| |
| ▲ | themaninthedark 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | No. Full stop. Laws are supposed to be crafted to be as applied by anyone, anywhere and at any time. This is why lawyers and politicians are supposed to have foresight and be prudent. You look at prior events and see them as justified due to the people involved and situations. If the US government can, for example investigate Richard Spencer or some other extremist figure based on a web post, then they can do the same for someone else on the other end of the spectrum. But even more terrifying is that they can do the same for someone not in the extremes. When my friends on the left held power and used it to quash the speech of my friends on the right, I spoke up. When my friends on the right are doing the same, I also speak up. The sad irony is that those not in power protest only when it is not their side. | | |
| ▲ | roughly 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Laws are supposed to be crafted to be as applied by anyone, anywhere and at any time. This is why lawyers and politicians are supposed to have foresight and be prudent. Except this is both impossible and a bad idea, which is why we have judges, juries, elections, and every other part of the system intended to constrain the blind application of the law. | |
| ▲ | ses1984 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | From my point of view it looks like the right only protests when it’s not their side. That’s why Al franken resigned for a dumb photo, meanwhile republicans protect pedophile traffickers. | | |
| ▲ | themaninthedark 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I would say that both sides have that view. Most people are in a bubble and are unaware of what their tribe is doing. I may be wrong but I think there have been Republicans who have resigned for extra-marital sex. While we are screaming about the current POTS and his relation with Jeffery, we gave Bill Clinton a platform to speak during the 2024 Convention. When I bring that up, I get told "It's important that we beat Trump." The Epstein was arrested in 2019, the files have been in the hands of both Democrats and Republicans. Neither group really looks like they want to prosecute anyone further; only use accusations that their opponents are in there to galvanize their base. |
| |
| ▲ | mindslight an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | What exactly are you saying "full stop" to? You have said very little that addresses anything I said, except to appeal to some vague sense of "both sidesism" which is so far away from our current predicament that the only applications I see are (1) to say "I told you so", which isn't productive and widely misses the mark with me (2) normalize the current situation and/or absolve blame by shifting it onto the other side. Investigative agencies are going to be able to investigate people. So supposing that the "US government can ... investigate Richard Spencer ... based on a web post" isn't a compelling argument unless your goal is to completely reject the concept of government. This can certainly be a consistent position (I've held it in the past), but it's not a common one. At which point it comes down to accountability for how delegated powers are used - both in individual cases, and to stop patterns of abuse. For example I've long argued we need to neuter the concept of sovereign immunity, and start routinely compensating people who are harmed by the government but never convicted of breaking the law - one should indeed be able to "beat the ride". So I'm not waking up to this in 2025 clutching my pearls gasping "I can't believe the government can just do this". I've been following how the government operates unaccountably for quite some time, and I'm pointing out that the current regime is still a marked escalation. This isn't to say I am pushing lame answers like "just vote Democrat" (I don't consider myself a Democrat). And I do agree that meaningful reform needs to be in general terms (eg aforementioned sovereign immunity example). But I also think that dismissing our current situation as some mere extension of what has been happening for a while is a terrible way of framing things. |
| |
| ▲ | chaps 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | And I'm getting tired of these comments that normalize the awfulness of the past. We can be pragmatic in recognizing that "our guys" also did bad things. Less bad than awful is still bad. If we choose not to recognize our own foibles then we just fall down our old patterns of "it's someone else's problem". Because otherwise, better than what we have now is an abysmal target and we should aim for better. | |
| ▲ | worik 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | No. The difference now is the number of people feeling effected It always been thus for people at the margins | | |
| ▲ | try_the_bass 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > It always been thus for people at the margins It's worth pointing out that "criminals" are generally "people at the margins"... If for no other reason than to point out that pithy comments like this are often so vague as to be worthless, or even counter-productive! It's also a good thing that antisocial behavior is often isolated to "the margins", so your statement can even be considered a good thing, by the same metric! TL;DR: Twitterisms like this are stupid. | |
| ▲ | mindslight 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | So we agree, including that there is a difference. | | |
| ▲ | bigbadfeline 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > So we agree, including that there is a difference. No, that's a distinction without a difference. I mean, it doesn't matter in the slightest if at some point in time certain powers weren't abused, if they're being abused now the situation cannot be tolerated. Arguing about how it's possible not to abuse the system is a waste of time at best and a diversion at worst. | | |
| ▲ | mindslight 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm not arguing that it's possible to not abuse the system. I've recognized abuses for quite some time, regardless of which political team has been in power. The point is that we need to avoid normalizing our current situation by pointing to previous abuses. |
| |
| ▲ | shevy-java 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | But did you not disagree before? The "I am getting tired" statement kind of implies that. | | |
|
|
|
