| ▲ | dgellow 2 days ago |
| They are in the process of building a new country little by little. Eventually they will openly dismiss the US constitution. Things are really, really bad. We are pretty much in US‘s Weimar period. The fact all of that was predictable makes it just so frustrating to see it play out in real time |
|
| ▲ | willmadden 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| I agree. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the US balkanizes. That might not be a bad thing if it can happen peacefully. |
| |
| ▲ | NoGravitas 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The problem with the US balkanizing is that there's not really any such thing as a 'red state' or a 'blue state'. Every 'red state' has some blue cities, and every 'blue state' has some red rural areas. Pretty sure California has more Republican voters than any state except Texas. So partitioning on state lines doesn't really work. Maybe over time people could migrate, but using South Carolina as an example, the two largest cities in the state would largely have to empty out. The state would cease to function. | |
| ▲ | bamboozled 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | When I see all the rot on the news I really wonder what the alternative is. It’s all so absurd I just wonder if there is a point where people just move on and form a new country / government and let the other country do ufc on the lawn or whatever. |
|
|
| ▲ | like_any_other 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | malnourish 2 days ago | parent [-] | | The United States has always dealt with this - the North Virginian voters circa 1960 were not, by and large, indigenous. | | |
| ▲ | like_any_other 2 days ago | parent [-] | | > The United States has always dealt with this Did you mean to write "America" instead of "the United States"? Because when the continent had only American Indians, there was no United States. And in fact for a long while after it was founded, they were excluded from citizenship. Regardless, I'm sure we both agree that European conquest and colonization represented a giant change. It's false to imply that another such change isn't a change, by virtue of it happening once before already. Or to imply that therefore, the country is compelled to submit to such a change. | | |
| ▲ | malnourish a day ago | parent [-] | | If I wanted to be that pedantic, I could have looked up one of the many words for the land the displaced indigenous peoples used. | | |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | zeroonetwothree 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What does this even mean? The decision came out the “right” way today. |
| |
| ▲ | harimau777 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Four of the justices dissented on something that by any reasonable reading should have been a unanimous decision. That is a BIG problem because that means that almost half of the Supreme Court are off their rockers. |
|
|
| ▲ | andsoitis 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > hey are in the process of building a new country little by little. Eventually they will openly dismiss the US constitution. Things are really, really bad. We are pretty much in US‘s Weimar period. Why the scaremongering? What are "they" waiting for? |
| |
| ▲ | cosmicgadget 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Without saying I believe the statement above, boiling the frog is a legitimate tactic. Think of all the things considered normal now that would have been absurd before 2016. | |
| ▲ | superultra 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Surely we’re aware of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 yes? It spells out exactly what they are doing, & where they are going. Eliminating birthright citizenship is a key component dating back decades. https://www.heritage.org/the-constitution/report/feudalism-c... | | |
| ▲ | andsoitis a day ago | parent [-] | | Thanks for posting that link. I read part of it and their reasoning strikes me as contortionist. Good then that after decades, as you point out, that argument has not won out. I would love to actually debate this issue with someone who does believe birthright citizenship is not a thing. |
| |
| ▲ | matthewdgreen 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Durable control of elections, and maybe one or two more justices. | |
| ▲ | dgellow 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | It’s not an ominous “they”, it’s a very well understood patchwork of actors who have been pushing for the end of American democratic, liberal system. The heritage foundation is an important component, but you can add the Thiel fellows, the GOP, evangelical fundamentalists, the right wing media ecosystem, and quite a lot more. They’ve spent multiple decades developing an interconnected infrastructure of think tank, media groups, legal advocacy groups, donor networks, political organizations. They are all working to reshape American institutions away from liberal democratic norms, towards an autocratic conservative governance model. It’s not a new thing or something discussed in underground circles. They have been very vocal and open about their goals, and you can find a lot of investigative work in that whole movement. Their most obvious victory so far has been the complete take over of the Supreme Court, allowing the realization of the idiotic, fascist “Unitary executive theory” concept. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_nationalism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025 If that sounds scaremongering you might want to reevaluate your sources of information for at least the past decade |
|
