Remix.run Logo
▲ goatlover 2 hours ago

No Kings is a catchall for no tyrants or authoritarians. It's what the founding fathers were worried bout when setting up the US representative democracy with checks and balances and a constitution. They didn't want a president to act like a tyrant or a king.

▲aeternum an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Would the founding fathers support a wealth tax and do you?

▲verdverm 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Reading the Federalist Papers these days feels quite ominous. So many passages describe Trump to a T.

▲kefirlife 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

And somehow the federalist society folks stick their head in the mud and make up some nonsensical interpretation, violating the clear and obvious interpretation, to justify further eroding rights and democracy. A party of greedy and traitorous fools taking down the country they pretend to love, enriching themselves at every step.

▲samatman 37 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I do not believe you have been "reading the Federalist Papers".

I do believe you read a blog post where someone told you there were passages which "describe Trump to a T".

This one, probably: https://archive.thinkprogress.org/how-hamilton-warned-in-the...

▲ModernMech an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

They were describing their experience dealing with kings and people who want to be kings. King is a personality type, not only a role. In more clinical settings they’re called narcissistic sociopaths, which is what Trump has proven himself to be, so that’s why we call him a king. Sometimes their title is “dictator”, sometimes it’s “emperor” or “fuhrer” or “chairman”. In this case his title is “president”, but he acts like a king, so that’s why we say we don’t want kings. This applies equally to wannabe kings.