Trump to remove commander of D.C. National Guard mid-inauguration

[The Romulan Republic]

Hey, if Sea Skimmer wants to start a new thread to debate the Draft Riots, I'm up for it. Though I'm not sure what their is to discuss. Contrary to his claim, I'm not defending the draft policy, so the only major point to argue, it seems to me, is whether the rioters themselves are sympathetic, or were pushed into mass murdering cops and black people. If Sea Skimmer really wants to argue that... well, I say give him rope to hang himself with.

[Flagg]

What riot? WTF are TRR and SS reaching into their diapers and flinging whatever they pull out at each other about?

There were massive riots in New York City in response to Lincoln's use of conscription during the Civil War. Sea Skimmer brought it up as an example to put Trump's crimes and probable crimes in context. They're arguing about it.

It is, to put it mildly, a tangent.

And a dumb one. If you want to go anywhere you'd pick FDR's putting American Japanese (and some much smaller number of Italian and German) citizens and immigrants into concentration internment camps since Donnie Dinglberry wants to round up the people who do his yard work and build his shitty casinos undocumented Latinos and scary to racists brownish people Muslims and boot them out.

[Flagg]

Hey, if Sea Skimmer wants to start a new thread to debate the Draft Riots, I'm up for it. Though I'm not sure what their is to discuss. Contrary to his claim, I'm not defending the draft policy, so the only major point to argue, it seems to me, is whether the rioters themselves are sympathetic, or were pushed into mass murdering cops and black people. If Sea Skimmer really wants to argue that... well, I say give him rope to hang himself with.

Cops in NY in the 1860's were not like the cops of today (who have to play pretend) and pretty much every riot in a major city during that time period ended up as a race+ grievances (real or imagined) riot.

No matter who wins, we all lose.

[The Romulan Republic]

Oh, no doubt, but I'm still having a hard time mustering much sympathy for a fucking lynch mob big enough to qualify as a small insurrection.

[Sea Skimmer]

Complex institutions doesn't necessarily equate to strong institutions. And as you noted, the massive economic problems are their, and Trump capitalized on them in exactly the manner would-be strong men tend to. If you thinking he's going to actually do anything to fix them, you're an even bigger idiot than I thought, especially when his appointments thus far (and, you know, his actions throughout his whole fucking life) have made it clear that this is to be a government by the very rich, for the very rich.

Where did I say I think he's going to actualy do anything? I'm point out the actual damn situation in the country and what is and is not legal, and what people are expecting, something you seem to either ignore or be indifferent too. God, congress is repealing Obamacare as we speak, have you put any damn effort into contacting your representatives yet or just howl useless outrage online?

Are you suggesting that I advocated opposing him through illegal means?

No I'm saying your kind of attitude is going to make it harder to oppose him when he does illegal things, because it lacks proportionally.

Aww, you think Trump's campaign promises are actually an indication of what he's going to do. That's just adorable.

Actually, no. Its kind of fucking scary. And rather sad.

If your confused and scared then you're just a fool right now. You understand that opposition doesn't work without organization and discipline right? That's long been why the Republicans are so effective. Clinton tried to copy that too, but really badly misunderstood it and ended up loosing the rustbelt when her resulting system was deprived of the ability to adapt. Angry and determined is where you want to be.

Trump has already done illegal things, if we take him at his own fucking word.

I'd assume so, as a private citizen. But as a president he cannot exercise any power what so ever until he is sworn in. That's why the damn General only looses his job 3 hours later for example.

And ugly as it may be, and I'm not saying its a good idea, relentless exaggerated mudslinging does take a toll. I believe Hillary Clinton lost in no small part because the Republicans spent thirty years defaming her, and creating a public perception of her as corrupt and evil despite her never being convicted of a single damn thing.

So your saying we'll need thirty years of mudslinging to hopefully defeat Trump by an incredibly tiny margin of votes? Sorry I don't accept that as a good plan right now when the cogs are already turning. The focus should be on fucking congress right now, since even a lot of Republicans are waviering.

First off, I never once defended that draft or any other. I am morally opposed to the draft, and consider it a form of involuntary servitude that should be considered a violation of the 13 Amendment (although that Amendment was passed after the New York Draft Riot). So I expect you to immediately retract and apologize for the claim that I do not object to the draft, or to the rich being able to buy their way out of it.

Soon as you stop calling me a racist for understanding this nations history a lot better then you do. And I really don't have respect for people who limit themselves to moral opposition when the issue is military service in a massive active war.

Secondly...

THEY. WERE. A. LYNCH. MOB. A giant lynch mob that rampaged out of control across a major city for days on end. A point you still haven't really acknowledged.

I know it. I also know that it was primarily the poorest, most downtrodden most discriminated against white people in the damn country leading it. Something you seem to think doesn't matter even though its noted in your own quote. The people who really did rank just one step above the damn slaves themselves, ignoring the Indians who are already been functionally exterminated east of the Mississippi and might as well have not been counted as people or even property at the time in governmental terms. And that this was further driven by the racist decision, of the US government, not to apply the draft to blacks at all. So yeah I do have some sympathy for those people facing being forced at gunpoint to fight on racial grounds in the first place and subject to execution if they refused. If the government institutionalises racism you will get a racist response. Amazing.

As it was while the draft went ahead the draft riot did ensure that the US government never really tried to enforce it on a wide scale, so like it or not this form of opposition mattered.

Are you really fucking morally bankrupt enough to say that they were "forced" to be one?

Ample warning was given to the Mayors office that attempting to enforce the draft in NYC would led to violence. This was going on for months beforehand. The government choose to force the matter but was too incompetent to actually prepare for it. The alternative for these people was a high probability of was to be forced into the army, where the punishment for not obeying was DEATH anyway. That makes people irrational. Moral opposition, which had already been offered on a wide scale, is fucking useless in the face of naked violence, which is what conscription is.

[Sea Skimmer]

And a dumb one.

It's not dumber then the original irrational fear in question.

If you want to go anywhere you'd pick FDR's putting American Japanese (and some much smaller number of Italian and German) citizens and immigrants into concentration internment camps since Donnie Dinglberry wants to round up the people who do his yard work and build his shitty casinos undocumented Latinos and scary to racists brownish people Muslims and boot them out.

The thing on that one is the courts actually ruled it legal at the time; though they cited absolutely no legal precedent for doing so other then 'war emergency' and the text of the ruling as I recall all but openly said this ruling wasn't going to stand long. Sorry but it does not compare to deporting illegal immigrants. The immigration laws are clear and constitutional. But it is a perfect example of how non enforcement of the law undermines the damn system of government, because now indeed we have a situation where enforcing the law is unjust to the moral sense of a large portion of the entire population, and that's been building up for over fifty years. If I had a lot of money I'd start a damn propaganda campaign about how the US would have had a much harder time beating Hitler without hoards of Mexican labor crossing the border, but as is I think the DNC would never run with this, and it would have certain risks in its approach.

[Flagg]

And a dumb one.

It's not dumber then the original irrational fear in question.

If you want to go anywhere you'd pick FDR's putting American Japanese (and some much smaller number of Italian and German) citizens and immigrants into concentration internment camps since Donnie Dinglberry wants to round up the people who do his yard work and build his shitty casinos undocumented Latinos and scary to racists brownish people Muslims and boot them out.

The thing on that one is the courts actually ruled it legal at the time; though they cited absolutely no legal precedent for doing so other then 'war emergency' and the text of the ruling as I recall all but openly said this ruling wasn't going to stand long. Sorry but it does not compare to deporting illegal immigrants. The immigration laws are clear and constitutional. But it is a perfect example of how non enforcement of the law undermines the damn system of government, because now indeed we have a situation where enforcing the law is unjust to the moral sense of a large portion of the entire population, and that's been building up for over fifty years. If I had a lot of money I'd start a damn propaganda campaign about how the US would have had a much harder time beating Hitler without hoards of Mexican labor crossing the border, but as is I think the DNC would never run with this, and it would have certain risks in its approach.

And what about undocumented parents with US born children? Where are the kids going to be housed if the parents demand the kids stay since they are American citizens? And where are the 12,000,000 undocumented immigrants schedualed for liquidation deportation going to be housed as their legal proceedings are underway in what will be an overcrowded quagmire shitshow of a process?
I'm not arguing about how, why, good, or bad the situation was allowed to get, but it's the situation. How do we deal with it if the descision is "round 'em up and throw 'em out"?

Plus there's the whole "No Dogs Muslims Allowed" issue.

And FDR flat admitted that giving American citizens of Japanese descent 48 hours to sell any property that wouldn't fit in a duffel bag before being put in camps surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards was unconstitutional. The only positive is that at least the American citizens with different hued skin and eye shapes were protected from the stupid cowards who would have lynched them.


Btw, what was the original irrational fear? I'm missing something.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Paul Krugman doesn't share Sea Skimmer's faith in the strength of American institutions.

Many people are reacting to the rise of Trumpism and nativist movements in Europe by reading history — specifically, the history of the 1930s. And they are right to do so. It takes willful blindness not to see the parallels between the rise of fascism and our current political nightmare.

But the ’30s isn’t the only era with lessons to teach us. Lately I’ve been reading a lot about the ancient world. Initially, I have to admit, I was doing it for entertainment and as a refuge from news that gets worse with each passing day. But I couldn’t help noticing the contemporary resonances of some Roman history — specifically, the tale of how the Roman Republic fell.

Here’s what I learned: Republican institutions don’t protect against tyranny when powerful people start defying political norms. And tyranny, when it comes, can flourish even while maintaining a republican facade.

On the first point: Roman politics involved fierce competition among ambitious men. But for centuries that competition was constrained by some seemingly unbreakable rules. Here’s what Adrian Goldsworthy’s “In the Name of Rome” says: “However important it was for an individual to win fame and add to his and his family’s reputation, this should always be subordinated to the good of the Republic … no disappointed Roman politician sought the aid of a foreign power.”

America used to be like that, with prominent senators declaring that we must stop “partisan politics at the water’s edge.” But now we have a president-elect who openly asked Russia to help smear his opponent, and all indications are that the bulk of his party was and is just fine with that. (A new poll shows that Republican approval of Vladimir Putin has surged even though — or, more likely, precisely because — it has become clear that Russian intervention played an important role in the U.S. election.) Winning domestic political struggles is all that matters, the good of the republic be damned.

And what happens to the republic as a result? Famously, on paper the transformation of Rome from republic to empire never happened. Officially, imperial Rome was still ruled by a Senate that just happened to defer to the emperor, whose title originally just meant “commander,” on everything that mattered. We may not go down exactly the same route — although are we even sure of that? — but the process of destroying democratic substance while preserving forms is already underway.

Consider what just happened in North Carolina. The voters made a clear choice, electing a Democratic governor. The Republican legislature didn’t openly overturn the result — not this time, anyway — but it effectively stripped the governor’s office of power, ensuring that the will of the voters wouldn’t actually matter.

Combine this sort of thing with continuing efforts to disenfranchise or at least discourage voting by minority groups, and you have the potential making of a de facto one-party state: one that maintains the fiction of democracy, but has rigged the game so that the other side can never win.

Why is this happening? I’m not asking why white working-class voters support politicians whose policies will hurt them — I’ll be coming back to that issue in future columns. My question, instead, is why one party’s politicians and officials no longer seem to care about what we used to think were essential American values. And let’s be clear: This is a Republican story, not a case of “both sides do it.”

So what’s driving this story? I don’t think it’s truly ideological. Supposedly free-market politicians are already discovering that crony capitalism is fine as long as it involves the right cronies. It does have to do with class warfare — redistribution from the poor and the middle class to the wealthy is a consistent theme of all modern Republican policies. But what directly drives the attack on democracy, I’d argue, is simple careerism on the part of people who are apparatchiks within a system insulated from outside pressures by gerrymandered districts, unshakable partisan loyalty, and lots and lots of plutocratic financial support.

For such people, toeing the party line and defending the party’s rule are all that matters. And if they sometimes seem consumed with rage at anyone who challenges their actions, well, that’s how hacks always respond when called on their hackery.

One thing all of this makes clear is that the sickness of American politics didn’t begin with Donald Trump, any more than the sickness of the Roman Republic began with Caesar. The erosion of democratic foundations has been underway for decades, and there’s no guarantee that we will ever be able to recover.

But if there is any hope of redemption, it will have to begin with a clear recognition of how bad things are. American democracy is very much on the edge.

I, for one, am inclined to agree with him (at least on principle; I think he is overstating the case a bit). Blind faith in American institutions just starts to sound like generic "RAH AMERICA GREAT" nonsense; it's more or less the exact mindset that led to the public overlooking all of the issues resulting from the War on Terror, like torture. Even if you don't think Trump is capable of becoming a dictator overnight, that doesn't mean he cannot cause irreparable damage to the already weak institutions that Skimmer is so confident about. Skimmer says he likes to think about the long game, but he seems to be overlooking the fact that the long game for the Republican Party as it currently stands is to actively erode democratic institutions. Just look what they did in North Carolina, recently. Look at the decades of gerrymandering and voter suppression.

[The Romulan Republic]

Pretty much.

I don't expect Trump to declare martial law and pronounce himself President for Life on inauguration day. I don't think anyone (sane) does. But I do think he, and his Republican cohorts, will be actively working to make the country more despotic and less democratic in nature, and that given sufficient time and apathy, they could succeed.

And what little faith I had in our institutions has taken a severe beating during this election, due to things like the FBI partisan interference, the Russian interference (any real investigation into which or response to will likely be dropped after Inauguration Day), the Electoral College once again decreeing that the will of the people doesn't matter for election results, the widespread voter suppression, the obvious DNC favouritism towards Hillary Clinton despite their supposed neutrality, and on and on and on.

[General Zod]

Pretty much.

I don't expect Trump to declare martial law and pronounce himself President for Life on inauguration day. I don't think anyone (sane) does. But I do think he, and his Republican cohorts, will be actively working to make the country more despotic and less democratic in nature, and that given sufficient time and apathy, they could succeed.

And what little faith I had in our institutions has taken a severe beating during this election, due to things like the FBI partisan interference, the Russian interference (any real investigation into which or response to will likely be dropped after Inauguration Day), the Electoral College once again decreeing that the will of the people doesn't matter for election results, the widespread voter suppression, the obvious DNC favouritism towards Hillary Clinton despite their supposed neutrality, and on and on and on.

Republicans have already taken the first steps toward making sure that party ideology is a requirement to ensure you have a federal job.

[Flagg]

Donnie Douchebag won't declare himself king and dissolve congress on day one. He'll wait until a terrorist group he ignores in favor of grabbing pussy strikes, then declare himself king and dissolve congress.

[General Zod]

Donnie Douchebag won't declare himself king and dissolve congress on day one. He'll wait until a terrorist group he ignores in favor of grabbing pussy strikes, then declare himself king and dissolve congress.

Don't worry, we'll be picking a fight with China soon enough and he can use that as an excuse.

[Napoleon the Clown]

Checks and balances only work if those in charge of those things want to, you know, keep you from abusing power. Considering the people who will soon be in power, and how the Supreme Court will potentially be filled with conservatives, having faith that the government will not abuse its power is naive as fuck at best, willfully moronic at worst.

The GOP has already shown that it has a much looser definition of civil rights than the Democrats.

[The Romulan Republic]

Checks and balances only work if those in charge of those things want to, you know, keep you from abusing power. Considering the people who will soon be in power, and how the Supreme Court will potentially be filled with conservatives, having faith that the government will not abuse its power is naive as fuck at best, willfully moronic at worst.

The GOP has already shown that it has a much looser definition of civil rights than the Democrats.

This exactly. Far Right Republicans (is their any other kind any more?) already control two branches of the Federal government (though mercifully not with a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate), and will likely soon control all three, having effectively stolen a Supreme Court nominee from Obama with their obstructionism. And in any case, the Democrats have so often been the party of compromise to the point of surrender that my faith in their willingness to use the numerous road blocks they could throw up in Trump's path is limited until proven otherwise.