Capitol Insurrection / rebellion thread

[Eviscero]

wot the fok anarchists are far left

Sure, anarchism is a philosophy built on the rejection of social hierarchies. Fundamentally and historically this is far left and aligns with modern far left democrats but only to the extent that their proposed policies aim to bring into balance the social and economic disparity that emerges from unregulated capitalism. But to achieve these aims, progressives push for significant government intervention, regulation, spending, etc. This is hardly the position of the rioters in question who are supporting the abolition of government and are expressly stating their opposition to Biden and the Democratic party! You use "far left" simply to tie these violent rioters (which, by the way, democrats have never had a problem condemning) to the progressive socialist arm of the Democratic party. I guess you could try to call them left wing libertarians and then you might get closer to one type of anarchist, but that kind is not who was rioting. Bottom line, you are being disingenuous.

[Forogil]

look like black bloc which is more of a tactic

Yes, looking at the images they very much look like the normal far-left wing anarchists.

Including drawings of Kalashnikovs (I would guess right-wing militias use American weapons, and mean something else with drawing a weapon).

And I simply don't understand who think they are now right-wing and/or the ones that claimed that previous destruction was only due to right-wing infiltrators. Is the new idea that we have right-wing infiltrators infiltrating their natural enemies the right-wing anarchists to put them in a bad light?

Sensible people can say that someone else happen to share some concerns, but they still reject them due to their actions. Failure to do so, and demanding it of others is just hypocrisy.

[Edge-]

https://twitter.com/HuntTheColton/st...39488070197251

Did Donald John Trump incite the erection? Chuck Schumer is dying to know!

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.newsweek.com/lauren-boeb...mments-1563699

What's with these pro-insurrection Republicans and either being literally retarded, or just cosplaying that they're retarded for their bases? Seriously, it can't be a coincidence they all appear this deeply fucking moronic.

[solinari6]

https://www.newsweek.com/lauren-boeb...mments-1563699

What's with these pro-insurrection Republicans and either being literally retarded, or just cosplaying that they're retarded for their bases? Seriously, it can't be a coincidence they all appear this deeply fucking moronic.

Trump showed them that stupidity sells.

[Felya]

https://twitter.com/HuntTheColton/st...39488070197251

Did Donald John Trump incite the erection? Chuck Schumer is dying to know!

Fucking coomers... control your self Schumer... he been gone for just two days...

[wunksta]

https://twitter.com/HuntTheColton/st...39488070197251

Did Donald John Trump incite the erection? Chuck Schumer is dying to know!

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.newsweek.com/lauren-boeb...mments-1563699

What's with these pro-insurrection Republicans and either being literally retarded, or just cosplaying that they're retarded for their bases? Seriously, it can't be a coincidence they all appear this deeply fucking moronic.

Isn't the Paris Agreement a non-legal binding agreement? If so, it doesn't require approval of the senate. I don't expect Boebert to realize that and it's just more political theater for her base.

[shimerra]

I mean the same people who oppose still exist, but I suppose that liberal democracies like the US are instead overthrowing democratic govs is really working out great.

It is. Or at least better than the childish stupidity that is most anarchist thought.

Again I never said that the status quo was perfect or even ideal. But if you're trying to suggest the toddler level thinking that most anarchists' claim? Yeah no thanks. Unlike you I prefer to make things better, not worse.

[Drutt]

Isn't the Paris Agreement a non-legal binding agreement? If so, it doesn't require approval of the senate. I don't expect Boebert to realize that and it's just more political theater for her base.

Not to mention that if it is unconstitutional, the Senate approving of it wouldn't matter because...it would still be unconstitutional.

She clearly knows the square root of fuck all about US civics. And I suspect you could replace "US civics" with just about any other two words, in all honesty.

[Edge-]

I feel like there are a great many American education memes I could link to here, but is there genuinely no educational standard for someone to be a member of the House or Congress? Why are people this stupid actually allowed to run and help shape the entire country?

There is not.

For the House - To be elected, a representative must be at least 25 years old, a United States citizen for at least seven years and an inhabitant of the state he or she represents.

For the Senate - The Constitution sets three qualifications for service in the U.S. Senate: age (at least thirty years of age); U.S. citizenship (at least nine years); and residency in the state a senator represents at time of election.

Pretty much just "Be 35, a citizen and live here for a while". They could not have a single day of school in their life and could be literally illiterate, and that would not bar them from serving.

[wunksta]

They could not have a single day of school in their life and could be literally illiterate, and that would not bar them from serving.

Kind of opens up to populism but the alternative seems to be having a bunch of restrictions on who can and can't run for office which goes against the spirit of democracy I think. There's been a lot of restrictions that have been used to keep minorities from holding office for example.

[Edge-]

Kind of opens up to populism but the alternative seems to be having a bunch of restrictions on who can and can't run for office which goes against the spirit of democracy I think. There's been a lot of restrictions that have been used to keep minorities from holding office for example.

Yep.

I mean, my historical understanding was basically that people have wanted educated people representing them. Smart people who know more about the issues than they do.

But for the past handful of decades we've had a war against education/intelligence/expertise by conservatives, who attack all those things as being anti-conservative. As they then vote for an ivy-league Republican because they carry a gun and don't talk smart, anyways.

I agree, adding a ton of requirements would be undemocratic and onerous. But like...I'd be fine with the requirement that they at least have passed highschool/have a GED. That should be a bare minimum, and it is for just about any other job you get literally anywhere else.

[wunksta]

I agree, adding a ton of requirements would be undemocratic and onerous. But like...I'd be fine with the requirement that they at least have passed highschool/have a GED. That should be a bare minimum, and it is for just about any other job you get literally anywhere else.

The best way to do that would be to ensure that all people living in America have access to quality education. That would help improve a lot of things but the GOP keeps hamstringing their own states, which is likely for their own benefit.

[TigTone]

The best way to do that would be to ensure that all people living in America have access to quality education. That would help improve a lot of things but the GOP keeps hamstringing their own states, which is likely for their own benefit.

They use the playbook books from the past. Keep the masses ignorant and afraid so they only trust the hand that has fed them crumbs.

[Poopymonster]

They use the playbook books from the past. Keep the masses ignorant and afraid so they only trust the hand that has fed them crumbs.

The Mushroom diet.
Kept in the dark and fed shit.

[Rasulis]

Anyone seen op in a while?
@Kokolums when is that civil war coming now?

A large size armed insurrection will likely be very hard to organize in the US. NPR did an interview awhile back with one of the militia member that belong to the same organization that planned to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer (Governor of Michigan).

According to him, as soon as the ring leader (Adam Fox) started talking about the plot during the group meeting, half the audience stood up and left. They did not want to have anything to do with that. He claimed that the FBI has informers planted in the membership of every single militia groups in the US; bugs on every single facilities and residences; and phone taps on all the leadership groups. Something like the Oklahoma bombing can pass through the FBI net. However, organizing 200 heavily armed personnel to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer is not remotely realistic.

He sounded paranoid. However, the plot was uncovered based on information and recording provided by at least two confidential informers. So maybe he was not being paranoid after all.

[jonnysensible]

It is. Or at least better than the childish stupidity that is most anarchist thought.

Again I never said that the status quo was perfect or even ideal. But if you're trying to suggest the toddler level thinking that most anarchists' claim? Yeah no thanks. Unlike you I prefer to make things better, not worse.

what anarchists texts have you read?

[gondrin]

It's interesting that Fox immediately called the Portland stuff "insurrection" (it's the title of the article they're running right now), but not the thing in the capitol a couple weeks back.

Apparently, insurrection isn't when you take over the nation's capitol shouting "hang Mike Pence." It's when you riot at some random facility in Portland.

I see that Fox Opinions(I will not call it News as they do not publish the news) is trying to use big words again and failing at it.

- - - Updated - - -

A large size armed insurrection will likely be very hard to organize in the US. NPR did an interview awhile back with one of the militia member that belong to the same organization that planned to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer (Governor of Michigan).

According to him, as soon as the ring leader (Adam Fox) started talking about the plot during the group meeting, half the audience stood up and left. They did not want to have anything to do with that. He claimed that the FBI has informers planted in the membership of every single militia groups in the US; bugs on every single facilities and residences; and phone taps on all the leadership groups. Something like the Oklahoma bombing can pass through the FBI net. However, organizing 200 heavily armed personnel to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer is not remotely realistic.

He sounded paranoid. However, the plot was uncovered based on information and recording provided by at least two confidential informers. So maybe he was not being paranoid after all.

Yeah, after Oklahoma City bombing and a few other events, the FBI has had moles in a lot of the militia organizations. A lot of them talk a big game but will generally not do anything unless provoked OR can do it in the middle of a chaotic event(like the storming of the Capitol building). They like to play wargames but not actual war. Paper tigers and all that.

[Edge-]

I'm all for allowing anyone to run and having democracy and such, but I'd certainly want the people I could be voting for to have a modicum of education when running for such offices. People like Boebert kinda show why lol The worrying part is that she isn't some anomaly, either, there are others like her in power.

Recently the problem has been too many lawyers (I mean, not a bad thing since they're writing laws, but too much of a good thing can still be bad) and not enough people from other professions to lend that expertise and knowledge.

But instead we've got Republicans proudly sending know-nothings who are more interested in whipping up their bases with lies and bullshit than they are doing their jobs.

[shimerra]

what anarchists texts have you read?

Plenty. Although to be fair it's mostly the Anarcho capitalist dribble. You tend to see those more in America.

And your own excepts are a perfect reflection of the utter pie in the sky bullshit they espouse that gets skull fucked the moment it meets reality. So regardless you have your own self to blame because for what you linked what I said 100% applies. You may want to indulge the fantasies of the high school kid who managed to sow an anarchy patch on his back pack and is super proud because he did it all by himself. I'll pass just like I pass on the tax is theft idiots. Technically it'd be extortion if you really want to go that route, but even that's a dumb argument.

The idea is nice. But when it meets reality you'd be a complete and utter fucking idiot to think it'll work. Trump's gone. I don't see any reason I'd desire to argue for a system of government that is even more impractical and stupid than Trump as president was.

[Endus]

Plenty. And your own excepts are a perfect reflection of the utter pie in the sky bullshit they espouse that gets skull fucked the moment it meets reality. So regardless you have your own self to blame because for what you linked what I said 100% applies. You may want to indulge the fantasies of the high school kid who managed to sow an anarchy patch on his back pack and is super proud because he did it all by himself. I'll pass just like I pass on the tax is theft idiots. Technically it'd be extortion if you really want to go that route, but even that's a dumb argument.

The idea is nice. But when it meets reality you'd be a complete and utter fucking idiot to think it'll work. Trump's gone. I don't see any reason I'd desire to argue for a system of government that is even more impractical and stupid than him as president was.

I used to be into rational/utopian anarchy when I was younger. I've pretty much abandoned it entirely because it became more and more clear that their explanations for how society would self-govern basically boiled down to "people will just, like, do it, for free, because it's right, man". And the reality is that this just doesn't happen; we're too varied a species for everyone to engage in enlightened mutual self-interest. Some of us will try and exploit that state of being. Some of us will try and upset it somehow. People will constantly push and test the boundaries, and without codification, those boundaries are fluid, meaning you're essentially trying to build a stable society atop a bed of quicksand. Maybe you can get it in perfect balance to float, briefly, but it isn't gonna maintain that.

Plus, it gets misrepresented a lot. This kind of "anarchy" is, essentially, like a beehive or ant's nest. Society is that hive. The idea of "queens" in these insect groups is wildly out of step with actual hive dynamics; those "queens" issue no orders and have little to no control over anything; they are the fattened brood mares of the society. Heavily protected and defended, yes, because putting the hive's propagation onto one individual allows for the rest to focus entirely on other tasks, but it isn't a position of rulership, it's a specialized enslavement. So once we recognize that, we see the "anarchy" for what it really is; a heavily regulated society, with very little real freedom, because everyone is expected and obliged by that society to do their part in sustaining that society. Indeed, enforcement of societal constraints would have to be vigorous and heavily punitive, because any cracks in that structure pose the threat in the first paragraph here.

Take "rational anarchy", as Heinlein proposed it; you do whatever you want, but as a rational individual, you recognize that maintaining and contributing to society is necessary, so you do so. So you don't actually do "whatever you want"; you contribute to the maintenance of society and your fellow citizens first and foremost, and what freedom you get is aside from that. This becomes particularly true when you recognize that society requires a lot of manual and/or gross labor, like sewage work and garbage cleanup and so forth; someone has to be volunteering to do those things, because they need to get done. Feeling obliged to do those things when you'd really rather be doing something else really isn't the "free society" where you can do whatever and it's all cool, man. In short, a lot of these "anarchic" systems require every member to be self-regulating; they aren't the absence of regulation. And failure to self-regulate means society will forcibly regulate you. It has to, in self-defense. And at this point, you're probably wondering what the fucking point is, then.

And that is, honestly, a pretty damned good question. Like I said; I used to support this kind of stuff.