Things that made you Facepalm today (Political Version)

[Androidpk]

Right- the real issue here is the difference between private citizens protesting and calling a group the "enemy of the people" because they've killed 1,000 unarmed people who mostly, suspiciously look like them and a sitting US President calling a constitutionally protected group the "enemy of the people" because they uncover legitimate corruption that he's been trying to hide from the American people.

You don't have to be okay with either of them, but they are NOT analogous.

I'm curious as to where his defenders draw a line with Trump's behavior. Would they be okay if he said Democrats were the enemy of the people? If black people were the enemy of the people? If Muslims were the enemy of the people? I don't know but something tells me they'd be perfectly fine with it and go along with it.

[Tgo01]

I'm far more concerned with the president of the United States acting in this manner.

Androidpk: I fully recognize that BLM and Antifa are partly responsible for violence against police officers and dozens of police officers are killed every year. I also blame Trump for a news organization receiving death threats. But I'm far more concerned with death threats than actual cold blooded murders.

This is pk jumping through hoops to appear to want to hold both sides accountable while also trying to maintain his current favor with the other two in the trio of dumbasses.

[time4fun]

I find it funny that every time you find yourself in a situation that calls out specific and dangerous mindsets and acceptances that you loop to "WELL TRUMP!" It never fails. I'm tempted to make that a free space on the Bingo card.

You're assuming these are unrelated phenomena, but the argument here is that they are not.

They may be unrelated, but you'd need to provide some evidence that they aren't related or weaken some evidence that was presented to suggest they are.

You can't go into a causal argument and then point out that it's a causal argument as though that somehow undermines it.

[Tgo01]

I'll withdraw the "mostly" and replace with "disproportionately affect" and then remind you that 77% of the US is white.

Is this the time we include Hispanic people as white or not? I can never keep this shit straight.

[Androidpk]

Androidpk: I fully recognize that BLM and Antifa are partly responsible for violence against police officers and dozens of police officers are killed every year. I also blame Trump for a news organization receiving death threats. But I'm far more concerned with death threats than actual cold blooded murders.

This is pk jumping through hoops to appear to want to hold both sides accountable while also trying to maintain his current favor with the other two in the trio of dumbasses.

Do you have any statistics you can show me that says BLM/Antifa are responsible for the deaths of dozens of officers over a periods of multiple years?

And yes, I'm more concerned with Trump's behavior, because he's the fucking POTUS with far reaching powers and influence. That you're okay with his behavior isn't surprising though.

[time4fun]

I'm curious as to where his defenders draw a line with Trump's behavior. Would they be okay if he said Democrats were the enemy of the people? If black people were the enemy of the people? If Muslims were the enemy of the people? I don't know but something tells me they'd be perfectly fine with it and go along with it.

There is no line. They've VERY well aware that what he's doing is un-American and anti-democratic. They've just come to the conclusion that democracy isn't going to get them the world they want because they're increasingly in the minority.

So they're absolutely fine with an authoritarian who is willing to "take on" the institutions they feel victimized by or are powerless over as long as they can convince themselves he's doing it "for them".

And that's how most authoritarians end up in power- democratically elected (approximately, in this case, anyway) before they proceed to dismantle every democratic system or norm that could possibly hold them accountable. And as long as that authoritarian keeps pointing to marginalized groups as the "enemy", it gives their followers the illusion of security.

These people are willing pawns in this game. They're very well aware of what they're doing- they just lack enough education to understand history and enough foresight to consider what this country looks like when these norms and institutions are broken.

[Astray]

I'm curious as to where his defenders draw a line with Trump's behavior. Would they be okay if he said Democrats were the enemy of the people? If black people were the enemy of the people? If Muslims were the enemy of the people? I don't know but something tells me they'd be perfectly fine with it and go along with it.

You're fixated incorrectly on the word Enemy. It's a bad sentence, yes. The idea of having an enemy is not a good one, now if that enemy is information the implication of censorship isn't far behind. Nobody wants that, I don't believe that Trump was stating (in any way) that the media should be censored or be considered worthy of violence.

Stop fixating on the word and consider the situation of media he believes himself to be in. That's how I looked at it, if that makes sense.

[Androidpk]

You're fixated incorrectly on the word Enemy. It's a bad sentence, yes. The idea of having an enemy is not a good one, now if that enemy is information the implication of censorship isn't far behind. Nobody wants that, I don't believe that Trump was stating (in any way) that the media should be censored or be considered worthy of violence.

Stop fixating on the word and consider the situation of media he believes himself to be in. That's how I looked at it, if that makes sense.

No

[time4fun]

You're fixated incorrectly on the word Enemy. It's a bad sentence, yes. The idea of having an enemy is not a good one, now if that enemy is information the implication of censorship isn't far behind. Nobody wants that, I don't believe that Trump was stating (in any way) that the media should be censored or be considered worthy of violence.

Stop fixating on the word and consider the situation of media he believes himself to be in. That's how I looked at it, if that makes sense.

.....

You are far smarter than this.

Stalin, Mao, and the Nazi Party ALL used this phrase in various languages.

This was not accidental terminology, and you know that. You don't accidentally- repeatedly- echo dictators and totalitarians (remember that Trump's ex-wife claimed he kept a book of Hitler's speeches by his bed). And if you somehow magically did, you'd stop as soon as the entire free world pointed out that you were literally borrowing a phrase from the world's most hated dictators.

[Astray]

I stand by my statement that I do not believe calling the media an 'enemy' was a call to violence or to actively seek out censorship. That's my thoughts on this whole thing and I'll dip out at that. I'm not changing any minds and I'm not seeing a reason to continue on if nobody is being convinced either way.