It’s not the scent of Fabulousness? Awww. Now I haz a sad.
I think it is more nuanced than that. There was violence during the Arab Spring, the American Revolution, French Revolution, etc etc, We don’t usually label those involved as terrorists.
But I don’t have a bet on a horse in this race to really argue the term too much.
1 Like
A democratically-elected government is nominally answerable to the people. We all have a say in how the laws are written and enforced, even if those checks and balances are imperfect and require constant vigilance.
The problem with vigilantes is that they have all the violence and none of the accountability.
18 Likes
The existing governments sure as heck did!
The nuance is ‘who won’
8 Likes
I’d say that the feds being in charge here is definitely the reason for the restraint, along with this being the middle of fucking nowhere. While having Republican congressmen on their ass for even thinking white militias can be terrorists is definitely a factor (BTW, elections matter! Remember to vote!), I’d like to think it’s also because the feds are smarter than the local cops that have been busting BLM heads.
1 Like
I am not confused. I am dealing with, as I clearly said, the far more general issues of access. Of whether or not it can be accurately said that the public are occupying a federal facility any more than the feds themselves already do.
It is a somewhat separate issue than who these people are, or what their aims may be.
Also, no, governments (plural!) do not have a monopoly on documentation.
The best kind in cinema!
Note: the hydrogen truck scene is priceless.
3 Likes
And yet, here you are . . .
18 Likes
They are part of a rebel alliance and traitors.
Help us, Teddy R., you’re our only hope.
4 Likes
Fatigue spell, too tired for the shop today. Such days suck.
18 Likes
From the king’s perspective, the United States was a nation-state founded by terrorists. Wait, I mean rebels. Insurgents? Anyway, ‘we’ won (single quotes applied here because, as with so many Americans, my ancestors were still in Europe at the time of the revolution and had nothing to do with it).
5 Likes
Semantic trap alert!
I see it as a distinction between administrating society through functions, versus roles. The differences between what works, and what does not. Versus arguing over who gets to do it. The former can be procedural and accountable to reason, while the latter always degenerates into popularity contests and cults of personality.
8 Likes
equating vigilance and vigilantiism? Yes, Yes that would be falling into one.
In terms of what ‘works’ - if you’re willing to shoot anyone who tries to evict you from not your land so you or your friend do not have to serve pending prison sentences is pretty far from civilized.
They have had their due process, they do not need your help.
5 Likes
Armed domestic terrorists take over federal building, but it’s OK, they’re white
So, you think I am derailing because you are more interested in the implications of racism? Then perhaps you should simply make a decision to discuss that angle! The topic title starts with a statement which perhaps some here accept without criticism, but this in no way explains why it should not be considered.
Sorry if it troubles you that some might find more/different significance here than you would prefer.
1 Like
It occurs to me that the last time Cliven Bundy and his boys pulled this kind of shenanigans, your government essentially caved in to all their demands.
You don’t have to be dr Benjamin Spock to conclude that this is how they´re gonna handle every single problem they have with government authority from now on.
7 Likes
If I remember correctly, they incinerated an entire city block, and among the dead were the wives and children of the MOVE group as well. The Philly mayor was an authoritarian of the first order.
4 Likes
“We don’t need government! We just need a system that effectively fills all the roles of government and also includes procedures and accountability! But DEFINITELY NOT GOVERNMENT.”
13 Likes
