591–600 of 977 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's as if you're trying to find every excuse to just not research on your own; instead you expect everyone to feed you information Here: https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/1q9tg16/updated_111_mi...
I have been keeping up to date on the videos coming out. The video you posted shows Renee obstructing
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have been keeping up to date on the videos coming out. The video you posted shows Renee obstructing
I'm not attempting to dispute whether or not she was obstructing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, they merely complain when it is deployed against them, as with ICE. Otherwise Waco would be a rallying cry of the US left, and it isn’t.
From "a problem" to "rallying cry" is a pretty neat goalpost move. Leftists have long warned that expansions of government power (in general) and police militarization (specifically) are most likely to be eventually used against leftists.
The late Murray Bookchin was the exception that proves the rule, and he was hardly popular or widely known, and made some astonishingly prescient interviews before he died about the direction it was all headed in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My counter-hypothesis is that America has never really known authoritarianism Funny, because the racist authoritarians most people point to as the canonical example were themselves directly inspired by the US example. I think a more realistic reason is that this particular brand of race-heirarchy-based authoritarianism that mostly only affects white folks if they are seen as challenging what it does to everyone els…
If you think that America and Europe have similar experiences with authoritarianism, I guess we just don't share basic ground truth. The fact that you are flip about it is just silly, and makes you seem unserious. Have a good day!
I didn't say the American and European experiences with authoritarianism were the same, or even similar, I said the American experience with a very specific orientation of authoritarianism, with a specific focus, is extremely deep and pervasive, and that that has explanatory power on the relatively mild reaction of the American public to a change in the intensity and overtness of that particular flavor of authoritarianism.
This is, in fact, very different from the European experience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
You should read more of the thoughts of America’s founding fathers. Government authority ends when its actions violate the Constitution (especially when checks and balances have failed) and the people are the final arbiters of what the government can and cannot do. Your analysis is completely antithetical to the values and ideals the United States was founded to protect. If the government repeatedly uses violence out…
2) Even setting that aside, what current actions violate the Constitution?
The First Amendment has seen time, place, and manner restrictions, particularly when it crosses the line into rioting or obstructing government operations.
The Fourth has allowed for brief questioning, reasonable suspicion, and the recent Vasquez Perdomo emergency order held that these recent stops are constitutional - so even your “checks and balances” idea is working against you, as multiple branches of government are in concurrence here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Are any of those things threatened and need defending? If you don't think authoritarianism or fascism actually has a way of harming those things, then no, I guess not. I think for most people who had to learn about these things in school growing up, for like 7 years or something, together with grandparents who experienced these things for themselves, it's pretty clear what's happening, but without actually having t…
It’s a disservice to the horrors of the Holocaust to implicitly compare returning Mexican nationals to Mexico, Somalis to Somalia, or hell, even Venezuelans to El Salvador with sending box cars of people to death camps. The US has had and enforced immigration laws for decades, with Obama alone deporting 3 million people. What aspect of Trump doing it is uniquely fascist/authoritarian?
Short non-extensive list:
Has enforcement been explicitly prioritized based on political control of areas? Yes, senior directives and public statements emphasized prioritizing deportations in Democratic-led cities.
Suppression of lawful civic activity? Yes, crowd-control force was repeatedly used against protesters, media, and observers near ICE facilities.
Have officials labeled resistance or disputed encounters as "terrorism"? Yes, senior DHS leadership publicly used "domestic terrorism" language in contested use-of-force cases.
Are there credible reports of physical or sexual abuse? Yes, civil-rights groups report detailed allegations at detention facilities
Are raids conducted with armored vehicles, masks, and heavily armed teams as standard practice? Yes, reporting documents armored vehicles, masked agents, and surge-style operations.
Have internal watchdogs or ombuds offices been dismantled or defanged? Yes, DHS eliminated or reduced multiple civil-rights and detention-oversight offices.
Has ICE expanded use of spyware, location tracking, or similar tools? Yes, contracts for advanced spyware and surveillance capabilities were activated and expanded.
Is enforcement content coordinated to generate viral political narratives? Yes, internal messages show coordination to amplify arrests and raids for public impact.
Is ICE currently exhibiting multiple indicators of a political-police / coercive-repression trajectory? Yes, politicized targeting, coercive force, anonymity, weakened oversight, surveillance expansion, political messaging.
Would you like me to go on? I have a couple of more, but I don't want to spam.
Do Americans not learn about fascism and authoritarianism in school when you grow up? Together with what to watch out for and more? Because it seems really obvious for us who did have that upbringing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes perfect sense to concentrate law enforcement in a state that is in defiance. Even if the absolute numbers are low, the state cannot back down from enforcing the law because some people are resisting. Otherwise you invite anyone to disregard any law they don’t like. The state won’t allow this and the only way to overcome this is either to change the law or toss out the government, and only one options is real…
I think most people involved in protests would not characterize the thing they are resisting as merely "law enforcement". What they are experiencing is an occupation by a politically weaponized paramilitary organization which is going door-to-door in their neighborhoods wearing masks, wielding ARs, yelling at people and brutalizing them. How do you think you would react if this was taking place in your community?
I am all for criticizing and pointing fingers at trump and this entire administration. But it does say they have been working with ICE for “years” in the article. What is not really clear to me is was the app made worse recently, was it originally commissioned under trump? Nothing about that changes that they should not be working with ICE and they deserve any pressure they get to cut ties. But there is some history…
I think it's pretty clear that we've slidden into this situation for years.
This is what privacy advocates have been shouting about a long time. When the systems are in place all you need is a trigger for everything to go to hell.
Reading comment sections for news like this makes one understand better how it is possible that widescale horrible things happen. At first you'll learn about something horrible in the past and think, How could people let that happen, yet alone participate in it? Well, its spelled out pretty neatly here. Some people don't care - its "them" being targeted (jews, tutsi, immigrants), not "us". Some people care, but not i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Maybe I’m wrong but I don’t think any rioters in countries like Spain go to a protest with a bet real chance on their minds that they might die. That's the thing, they do, and have in the past too. Some might even recall riots ~70 years ago that kind of spiraled out of control and led to a civil war. Looking at what's happening in Iran as we speak might be a good idea as well, where they've had enough, know that th…
> So this was the whole point with the 2nd amendment right, that when/if the government repress you in that way, you have weapons to fight back? The point of the second amendment was, in no small part, so that the central government wouldn't deny the states the means to commit genocide against the indigenous population on their own, because the states didn't trust he central government to be sufficiently enthusiastic…
What kind of revisionist history is this?
The feds were telling the states "screw off, we do the negotiating" before the ink was even dry on that. Steamrolling the natives was never really a seriously contested job or a point of political contention, the feds were always gonna be the ones to do it.