473
Trump rages at Biden for wrecking his plans for executions: ‘Makes no sense’
(www.thedailybeast.com)
this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
473 points (99.0% liked)
politics
19246 readers
3124 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's odd when you think about it. Republicans don't want abortion but whole heartedly support executions. Democrats are against executions but whole heartedly support abortion. Welcome to America.
It's more odd to me that the ones who believe in original sin and forgiveness for everything are the ones anti-abortion and pro-execution.
Conservatives aren't anti-murder, they are pro-suffering.
They are anti-abortion, because they don't ever get a chance to make the fetus suffer. And golly, the mother barely gets dehumanized at all.
Just think about all the in suffering that fetus skipped by not getting a disease that is easily preventable with a vaccination, and also, it will never know the hell of getting sick from drinking raw milk.
What sits particularly strange to me is democrats that are against capital execution, but for vigilante killings. Any argument to be made against capital execution is a hundredfold true for vigilante execution.
Class comrades are class comrades.
If you really don't understand why, then I would point you to a quote from Warren Buffet.
"There's class war alright and it's my class, the rich, that are waging the war and winning it."
Now class apologists will claim that WB was trying to foster class solidarity, but that fails to hold water under the scrutiny of his actions. Since, quite literally, the moment that he heard that one of his granddaughters had the temerity to give an interview to one of the Johnson & Johnson kids, he disowned her and hasn't allowed her back in the last ≈ decade and a half, which seems to have had the desired effect since he has another dozen and a half children and grandchildren, and no one in that family has appeared on camera critical of the system since then.
Source: The 1% documentary by said J&J heir
Edit: Happy Holidays everyone. Remember that the good that you do for your local communities will spread farther than you'll ever know.
Your reply isn't really relevant to what they said. You can feel solidarity with Luigi and still think the murder was morally wrong and shouldn't be celebrated.
Murder is wrong. Luigi didn't murder anyone. Luigi committed an act of self/community defense against a mass murderer.
No, he didn't. Deluding ourselves of that will just stop the problem from being truly fixed. Just look at how many people's take away from this is "maybe now CEOs will be nicer and more empathetic?". I shouldn't have to explain the problem with that, but I will expand on it by saying that the CEO is really just a scape goat; the real guilty ones are the owners, who are also the people that appoint CEOs, and who the CEOs have to please. This hasn't solved anything, and without a systemic change things will just go back to the way they were; if only because we exist in a very fast news cycle and the average person will most likely soon forget and just go back to their daily rut.
People want simple easy answers. This is true for everything, and it's no less true now. It's easy to sit at home and make memes and glorify someone else who - despite the fact I disagree with his methods - actually took action and did something, even if it meant risking comforts, privileges, or in this case even a death penalty; it makes people feel like they are doing something without having to take any real risks and without really changing anything, but it feels "effective" because it makes a lot of noise and creates a lot of headlines.
If you really want change, then more needs to be done. And sure, one way would be for more to follow Luigi's footsteps, but - and I won't even go into the pitfalls of that path - if you have enough people on your side for that to be successful and not be prosecuted/defend yourself from prosecution, then you could achieve similar societal change peacefully by community building and through mutual aid; side step existing capitalist and government institutions. But that takes actual effort; that takes actual willpower to affect real change; that requires people to be okay with losing some comforts and privileges - this is also true for Luigi's path, but the appealing part of Luigi's path is that it "only takes a few" (which as previously stated I disagree with) to affect that change, and those few get to be "someone else" and never the "I" in question. The "I" in question gets to remain at home, on their device of choice, talking about how good-looking, and cool, and heroic the "some else" who took the risk is, and make memes about it.
And that's one reason I feel so bad for Luigi. While the CEO is the scapegoat of the true (or at least more powerful) capitalists, Luigi is the scape goat of "revolutionaries" who don't really engage in any praxis.
That's just like your opinion, man.
Fact of the matter is that he absolutely did commit an act of community defence. He even alludes to that fact in his "manifesto"
Did you bother to read anything I said? Saying you did something doesn't make it true. Trump has also alluded that his foreign tariffs will bring prices down. Does that make it true?
I read what you said. It's irrelevant. You didn't bother to read the room.
What's relevant here and now is that the mass murderers up top are scared shitless, and we need to keep them that way.
Ok, so you definitely didn't read it. Perhaps you looked at the words, but clearly you did not read them. Cool. So glad to see this place become indistinguishable from reddit...
I read them. It's the same incremental change grassroots bullshit that the DNC has been parroting for my entire 44 years of life. That shit doesn't work. Community defence clearly does. Quit being a class traitor and class apologist or get out of the way.
Imagine thinking anything I said is allied with the DNC. Or that said anything about "incremental". Imagine reading what I said and then calling me a "class traitor" or "class apologist". You're either a bold faced liar, have the reading comprehension and politics understanding of a 4th grader, or your definition of reading is the same as that of people who "enjoy reading dystopian books" but complain about books becoming political.
Your high horsed spiel boiled down to two points. 1. The only way to affect real change is with community building. 2. You feel sorry for Luigi because you don't understand why people are celebrating the fact that he reminded us the only way actual change has ever happened historically.
The people are starting to sing, and you're trying to argue against the chorus
Let me give you a helping hand.
If I'm wrong and don't understand, why have none of the millions of people who supposedly back him followed suit? Why are you here instead of out there? Are you getting guns? Are you organizing with other people? Are you doing anything (praxis) towards achieving change in "the only way actual change has ever happened historically"? Or are you just spending your time online talking about it? As I said and will say again, Luigi is the scape goat of “revolutionaries” who don’t really engage in any praxis. The “I” in question (you) gets to remain at home, on their device of choice, talking about how (...) heroic the “some else” who took the risk (Luigi) is.
You also said previously:
I - unlike you it seems - don't want there to be "mass murderers up top" at all, or in fact for there to be anyone "up top" (totally in line with DNC^/s^). You say I don't want change, and that the thing you want is what affects actual change, and yet it seems you want no change other than - as I said in my original comment - for the powerful to be nicer (in this case, due to fear). Yet, somehow, I'm the one defending capitalists and being a class traitor. You also seem to have missed the fact - or just not understand - that the CEO is not the "true" capitalist; those are the owners of the companies, for whom the CEO works.
Lastly, I will reiterate one thing, and add something more relevant. If you have enough people to enact change through violence and defend yourself of the consequences, then nothing can stop you from just creating separate/parallel systems and side step the current one (the DNC totally wants you to do this btw^/s^). And if you actually want to go further than surface level into history, then go look at all the French revolutions as an example, read about them in detail, and see how many ended with an authoritarian in power.
If that still hasn't made my point clear, then nothing I say will; I'm ending the conversation here.
Yes I attent protests, and am part of local organizations. Yes I am armed. No I don't want the people up top, but if they are going to be there, they should live in fear.
As for why there haven't been copycats yet? These things take time to get rolling, and we haven't been presented another easy target yet. I've already said that billionaires should be our targets, not CEOs though not in this thread specifically.
No, one is the state abusing it's power vs an individual who may or may not be guilty.
The other is an individual risking their life against hostis humani generis -- ie, a brave hero.
The vigilante in order to retain support has a much much much higher burden of proof than the state. The state has many opportunities to kill a man, but the vigilante must only attack those who are both obviously evil and obviously out of reach of the law.
Luigi is popular because he met this burden of proof. If he had killed Jay-Z, or even P Diddy, it would not have been popular. After all, the law caught up with them. Before damage was done, no, our system isn't designed to help people, but it did catch up. In contrast, matt gaetz is obviously evil, obviously outside of the law, and therefore an enemy of all mankind. Im not gonna do it, but I would applaud anyone willing to put their life on the line to take his.