this nerd thinks we care about the pathetic justifications libs make for not being able to do good things
oh you think there should be a revolution? haven’t you taken civics 101, that’s against the law
your comment made me realize The Beatles - Revolution has gotta be one of the most libbed out songs of all time
yeah, it’s probably their most anticommunist:
“and if you go carrying pictures of chairman mao, you ain’t gonna make it with anyone anyhow”
… …
“don’t you know it’s gonna be alright?”
Miss me with that shit
TINA in song
Dana White: that’s fucking illegal
Trying to convert an atheist with Bible verses vibe.
The Book of Lib 5:38
To anyone from a non US system this is just sad. What is with the US libs thinking their separation of powers is remotely good instead of a deliberate attempt to avoide working class rule and maintain slavery? No sane person would give the US President the monarchical powers he has, even France is more limited.
Their views are religious doctrine, not based in any sort of conscious thought. America is good because America is great.
It’s more of a mantra to repeat than serious political analysis. Whenever our government wants to not do something, they have this to fall back on. It’s also a useful slogan for distinguishing ourselves from the “totalitarian” countries we want to invade.
It’s just hegemony. The entire American system goes unquestioned. It’s the default state of things, as nature intended.
The source of our disagreement must be that they simply have not internalized the same shit we all learned in high school.
Maybe… they continued learning after high school and college? Who pursues accruing new knowledge after being force-fed it for a portion of their lives?
Imagine believing in the Separation of Powers when the ruling class controls all branches of the government
Why yes, I support the Separation of Powers. How could you tell?
Love when libs think they can blow your mind with civics 101 middleschool level “theory”
The
method
-
Liberals cannot do that because it would be illegal
-
There’s nothing we can do about conservatives when they break the law, because they are too powerful
Lather, rinse, repeat.
The important part is that we failed the right way
We respected the norms and standards while being completely dysfunctional
One time an angry lib on
sent me a cartoon where an anarchist said “At last, I am the one pure leftist!” as he was being executed by a Nazi. It could easily have been altered to say “We couldn’t save anybody from the carnage, but at least we played by the rules!”
-
I am once again asking the posters accusing Hexbears of bigotry to provide an example of what they mean.
White fragility and calling for violence against the people of Nato.Bigotry against landlords
separation of powers? nah dude the president has all the guys with guns, if he really wanted to he could purge the ranks, keep loyalists, and kill the other branches. in fact, the truest idea of separation is, funny enough, the fact that there are many executives in governorships who have their own militias and state guards. but these are obviously dwarfed by national spending and national recruitment numbers
also you know, he could do huge damage to the whole system if he wanted to given the fact he can legally drone strike pretty much whoever he wants
The US president could make almost anyone in the world disappear, the only exceptions being heads of state with a nuclear arsenal behind them, but a single senator is somehow too much to handle.
What about the police? Its militarized there are many of them and can presumably be mobilized faster than the military. And while dwarfed by the national guards and army they could tip the balance one way or another in certain circumstances.
there is something to be said about communist infiltration of the executive branch of a country, but historically none of thats worked out in imperialist countries except for spying for AES. in czechoslovakia, partisan groups that were organized by cadres of the former czechoslovak military became radicalized throughout the course of the nazi occupation. after the war, the liberal government was reinstated by treaty (czechia proper technically never got occupied by the allies and the partisans restored order in the wake of the nazi defeat). these now communist partisans were then reintegrated into the liberal government’s military and police force, which was something like 60-40 communist to liberal. eventually, an election happened and a critical role over the police was given to a communist party member. they then purged the ranks of the police and did a soft revolution after all the liberals purged themselves from government positions in an act of protest of the police getting purged (hilarious!).
this has also happened in a similar way somewhat recently with nepal, but instead of nazis, they were dealing with a comprador monarchy. i believe there are also other places like in africa that have likely followed a similar path.
and yeah, id figure the police in america would answer to the governorship in a certain capacity given the governor’s ability to pardon non-federal crimes within the state. i would suspect that if socialism were to take root in america, itd be a bit like a free state and slave state divide like prior to the civil war, which in fact the ending of the civil war was the closest america had ever been to socialism given how popular radical republicanism was. they blew it though. you can see analogs to this idea in modern day federal states like russia and india and to a much lesser extent, czechia. czechia has many small localities that have pockets of socialism, russia has many places in the far east that has the KPRF running the show from the governorship down, and india has the red corridor + the southwest areas near/in kerala.
You have a lot of good takes, but these aren’t.
how is this a bad take, lmao. it isnt happening because those guys are his team, and that team is called team liberalism. to note: the czechoslovak communist revolution began through usurping the executive branch, and its a valid way for communists to come to power, if rare. you can even argue nepal is on a similar track.
You’re thinking of the military as this force that is blindly, personally loyal to the president. The military is not that politically uniform, and the only foreseeable president a chunk of them might go to bat for is Trump, and there are all sorts of separate problems with thinking Trump could purge the military then become a dictator with the remainder.
Say Sleepy Joe orders an Army unit to enter the capitol building and execute every Republican – are the hooting chuds in that unit going to say “yes, Mr. President” and do it? If Biden orders a drone strike on the the Florida gubernatorial mansion, is the lib officer (who joined because he thinks the military is a force for good) going to do it? How is the order to effectively start a second civil war going to go over among a rank-and-file that’s looking around and wondering who is on which side?
Say Sleepy Joe orders an Army unit to enter the capitol building and execute every Republican – are the hooting chuds in that unit going to say “yes, Mr. President” and do it?
i mean obviously joe isnt going to do this, as i said, its team liberalism. what i am saying is that if there were, by some arcane technology, a socialist president, then odds are there are many socialists in the military and likely have even infiltrated intelligence agencies to some degree. the move would be to purge the military and do a soft revolution. this isnt a likely scenario for an imperialist country, but this has happened in history to federal governments in the past. whats more likely is a socialist governorship does similar with the police and militia of the state, but that is still unlikely.
It’s just “political power grows out of a barrel of a gun” or to use a more US-relevant example: “Well, John Marshall has made his decision, but now let him enforce it.”
“I’m not going to enforce a law” is pretty far from “I’m going to have the military shoot the Supreme Court.”
This wouldn’t happen because America is ruled by a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie not because the “seperations of powers” means anything substantial.
Our friend is right here as well. Joe could abuse his powers at least to give him more leverage in negotiations. Instead, he is the capitulator-in-chief.
yeah he has so many powers that he can use but just chooses not to. you only need to flex the pinky of the executive branch to get most things done, so long as it is for liberalism
“It says it in our HOLY DOCUMENT that our elections are fair and free which means they are.”
liberals absolutely cannot fathom that someone else might be more read than they are so they assume all communists are the kids who fell asleep in the back of the class in 8th grade
The most in depth liberal political analysis is just mindlessly regurgitating thought terminating cliches from their high school civics class
Starship Troopers is effective at turning libs into fascists without needing the scratch precisely because it uses a high school civics class as a vehicle for disseminating its lazy propaganda
“You gotta vote JOE for Team Blue if you want anything good to happen in the USA!”
also
“JOE DOESNT OWE YOU ANYTHING!”
I recommend reading any version of the constitution of the USSR. There’s all kinds of enumerated positive rights. The government had legal obligations to safeguard your welfare, as opposed to the US government which is often legally prohibited from acting against the rich.
I think it’ll blow Americans minds to learn that the USSR went through multiple constitutions throughout its existence. Not half-assed amendments, entirely new constitutions that protected people’s rights explicitly.
Americans treat their constitution like the Bible and, also like the Bible, they use it to justify colonizing other countries. Because those authoritarian enemy states don’t have freedom like we do or whatever. Of course, reality is pretty much the exact opposite of that.
Socialist constitutions are always a great read, but of course liberals will say “well ackshually it’s all a ploy and they don’t follow it
”
Remember when Republicans just yeeted the Parliamentarian when he disagreed? I do. It was during the Bush era if you are wondering.
Separation of powers? How about you separate deez nuts?
fuckin gottem
