What would you suggest, load my pistols and rifle’s and go out in the street and start a hot response that would result in further casualties and prolonged suffering ? Bad decision . November is 10 months away. Unless you’ve forgotten in our country we stand by institutions and preserve the commitment to “rule of law”.
Who the fuck do you think you are broad brushing a very large constituency with your inflammatory rhetoric.
You accuse people that have worked very hard to have the life they have. You in fact vilify them for it.
If In November the country doesn’t make a correction then you can rest assured it wont be long before the violence escalates exponentially.
You either did not read the essay or you read it defensively. I advocated exposure through direct questions and withdrawal of social cover. That is not violence. That is refusing to protect people who support cruelty while claiming decency. If you cannot distinguish between those two things, the problem lies with your own comprehension.
You ask "who the fuck do you think you are" while making assumptions about my preparedness, my rhetoric, and my intent. I am someone who wrote an essay grounded in historical precedent and current policy. You responded with personal attacks and threats. That tells me the essay landed exactly where it needed to.
You invoke rule of law while defending an administration that ignores legal requirements on the Epstein files, deploys state violence selectively, and has Trump floating the idea of attempting to suspend midterm elections. This shows me that you do not believe in rule of law. You believe in institutions when they produce outcomes you want. The moment they threaten your position, you abandon them. Your own comment proves this.
You accuse me of broad brushing and inflammatory rhetoric while threatening violence if November does not go your way. You vilify me for revealing a pattern while defending voters who support someone who directly harms the people they claim to love. The irony is complete. You object to being described accurately while proving the description correct.
You claim people worked hard for what they have as if effort justifies alignment with authoritarianism. It does not. Building comfort through labor does not create immunity from moral judgment when you protect that comfort by supporting policies that harm others. The essay does no condemn success in any way. It identifies the mechanism by which successful people enable fascism when their status depends on maintaining hierarchy. You are describing that mechanism while denying it exists.
You close by threatening violence if November does not deliver your preferred result. You wrote that in defense of rule of law and institutions. Do you see the contradiction? You are conditionally committed to democracy. When it serves you, you invoke it. When it threatens you, you revert to authoritarianism and propaganda.
The work is not ten months away. The work is what you do today when someone asks you to reconcile your stated values with your actual positions. And based on this comment, you cannot do that work. You can only deflect, threaten, and project.
You asked who the fuck I think I am. I am someone willing to name what you are doing while you are doing it. You proved the thesis in your response. Thank you for the evidence.
This is your best work. The HOA analogy? Stroke of genius.
Thank you, Thea!
This is spot on, Justin. I’ve observed this for decades and appreciate you defining this phenomenon so clearly.
What would you suggest, load my pistols and rifle’s and go out in the street and start a hot response that would result in further casualties and prolonged suffering ? Bad decision . November is 10 months away. Unless you’ve forgotten in our country we stand by institutions and preserve the commitment to “rule of law”.
Who the fuck do you think you are broad brushing a very large constituency with your inflammatory rhetoric.
You accuse people that have worked very hard to have the life they have. You in fact vilify them for it.
If In November the country doesn’t make a correction then you can rest assured it wont be long before the violence escalates exponentially.
Hope you’re prepared!
You either did not read the essay or you read it defensively. I advocated exposure through direct questions and withdrawal of social cover. That is not violence. That is refusing to protect people who support cruelty while claiming decency. If you cannot distinguish between those two things, the problem lies with your own comprehension.
You ask "who the fuck do you think you are" while making assumptions about my preparedness, my rhetoric, and my intent. I am someone who wrote an essay grounded in historical precedent and current policy. You responded with personal attacks and threats. That tells me the essay landed exactly where it needed to.
You invoke rule of law while defending an administration that ignores legal requirements on the Epstein files, deploys state violence selectively, and has Trump floating the idea of attempting to suspend midterm elections. This shows me that you do not believe in rule of law. You believe in institutions when they produce outcomes you want. The moment they threaten your position, you abandon them. Your own comment proves this.
You accuse me of broad brushing and inflammatory rhetoric while threatening violence if November does not go your way. You vilify me for revealing a pattern while defending voters who support someone who directly harms the people they claim to love. The irony is complete. You object to being described accurately while proving the description correct.
You claim people worked hard for what they have as if effort justifies alignment with authoritarianism. It does not. Building comfort through labor does not create immunity from moral judgment when you protect that comfort by supporting policies that harm others. The essay does no condemn success in any way. It identifies the mechanism by which successful people enable fascism when their status depends on maintaining hierarchy. You are describing that mechanism while denying it exists.
You close by threatening violence if November does not deliver your preferred result. You wrote that in defense of rule of law and institutions. Do you see the contradiction? You are conditionally committed to democracy. When it serves you, you invoke it. When it threatens you, you revert to authoritarianism and propaganda.
The work is not ten months away. The work is what you do today when someone asks you to reconcile your stated values with your actual positions. And based on this comment, you cannot do that work. You can only deflect, threaten, and project.
You asked who the fuck I think I am. I am someone willing to name what you are doing while you are doing it. You proved the thesis in your response. Thank you for the evidence.