• hamid 🏴@vegantheoryclub.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    The American supreme courts massive and 180 turn from the previous decades of law is the textbook definition of tyranny. America used to have a grand tradition of what to do with tyrants.

    • rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      a grand tradition of what to do with tyrants.

      America as a nation was created by a subset of landed gentry who didn’t like paying taxes. They wanted to make Washington king. The founding fathers were basically the Megamind meme where Tighten (yes, it’s spelled Tighten, not “Titan”) says to the Mayor of the city: “More like under new management.”

      • callouscomic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        The founders were not a monolith and had mega-disagreements about how to proceed from day 1.

        • Liz@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          “okay, we’re not gonna have political parties, right guys?”

          Immediately form federalist and anti-federalist factions

        • rwhitisissle@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Sure, and they still managed to pass the alien and sedition acts. Saying they weren’t a monolith is a way of dismissing the mountain of evidence that suggests that, for most of them, participation in the democratic process of an inchoate American republic was intended only for a small segment of the population - literate (i.e. wealthy) white men. I’d suggest A People’s History of the United States if you want a better perspective on that.

    • Sneezycat@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      America always had big propaganda against other people’s tyrants, never against their own.

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      And Truman would have something to say about all of the Russian-bought members of Congress. History is cyclical, and we’re approaching another authoritarian period for global powers.

      • hamid 🏴@vegantheoryclub.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Americans are fucking up their own country, Americans are the ones that collapsed the government in Russia, re-wrote their economy, pushed in Yeltzin then invested in all the criminals there. Americans created this entire problem, as they are the worldwide empire with trillions of dollars and an agenda. It is cope to think that Russia has anything to do with it, if anything its their chickens coming home to roost.

        • freebee@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          If you haven’t yet, I recommend watching Traumazone. All 7 hours of it offers a beautiful insight in USSR 1980’s to 1999.

          Yes, USA supported shitty stuff. But the system rotted itself out first with corruption and production mismatching demand while fighting pointless war in Afghanistan, which created the power vacuum and collapse.

          • hamid 🏴@vegantheoryclub.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            The USSR failed because US caught them in a cold war specifically to bankrupt them. The Soviet Union fell not because of rot and mismanagement at the end but because they were attacked from the outside every second of its existence since 1917 for daring to stand up against business. This same external pressure is not true for the US. Russia wasn’t and isn’t attacking the US now. If anything “the Russians” work for certain Americans and not the other way around.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m not defending America’s actions. I’m stating that many members of US Congress are funded by Russian oligarchs.

          The influence was apparent when Republicans withheld aid from Ukraine until they were forced to choose between funding Ukraine along with Israel, or leaving Israel without weapons.

          Does that sound like a government body that is representing its constituents?

          • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            OK, but sending weapons to either of these places is bad, both for the people whose wealth is being wasted to blow up people on the other side of the world, mostly civilians (almost entirely civilians in Israel’s case) and the people getting blown up

              • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                The US is not supplying Ukraine with weapons because they have any interest in the well-being of the people in Ukraine. They are supplying the weapons to extend a war as long as possible to weaken Russia, at the expense of hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded Ukrainians and millions displaced.

                This is infinitely worse for the people living there than if Russia won a quick victory or if we’d taken literally any off-ramp in the last decade.

                • ProtecyaTec@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Fucking what?

                  It doesn’t matter what the US supplies Ukraine. It’s Ukraines fight. It’s up to Ukraine to decide to forfeit the fight or to keep fighting.

                  By your logic we (humanity) should just let any country invade any other country and take over it’s people just because “it’s easier to give in than fight.” Giving in would be for the benefit of the people, right? That’s what you’re saying? Fuck right off.

                  Russia should not have invaded Ukraine in the first place.

                  • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    It’s Ukraines fight. It’s up to Ukraine to decide to forfeit the fight or to keep fighting.

                    It was laughably corrupt before the war, and since it’s literally suspended elections. It’s a war between Russia and Ukraine’s ruling classes, the people only pay the price.

                    Russia should not have invaded Ukraine in the first place.

                    Sure, but Russia’s government doesn’t pretend to represent you or me. The US government does. We could have also avoided this by not doing a coup in Ukraine and putting a hostile government right on Russia’s border.

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m glad I’m not the only one seeing this happen all over the world. All over the world we have feckless neoliberal parties failing to represent their people and getting replaced with populist right-wingers.

          • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Not just Europe and the anglosphere. It’s also happening in Latin America (ecuador), and that’s basically all the regions where democracy used to be prevalent.

            The middle east is still as dictatorial as it always was. Asia is still as dictatorial as it always has. Africa is still as dictatorial as it always has. I know all of these regions are huge and diverse, and that there are democracies. But none of them I can think of has gained democracy.

            So the places that had democracy are turning less democratic, and the places that had little democracy still have little democracy. I’d say that’s an “All over the world” thing.

            • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              At least there’s Lula in Brazil. And I’m sure someone could come and tell me something bad about him, but not being Bolsonaro is a huge improvement, and I’ve heard other good things. In fact I believe the majority of Latin America is under leaders to the left of the US Democrats. And no I’m not counting non democracies like Venezuela or Cuba.

              • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                So the most Democratic countries on this planet according to you are cuba and china. Both of them are 1-party states, and China is straight up a surveillance state. Ok lol.

                Does china pay you or are you spreading their bullshit propaganda for free?

                  • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    I guess not having freedom of press and a very censored internet is an easy way to have the population like the government. You could feed people worms if you don’t let them know there’s other food out there, they’ll like you if you tell them out there not even worms exist.

                    The people of Hong Kong absolutely LOVED having their democracy suppressed by china’s (#1 best democracy of the world!!!).

                    I guess nobody even asked the Uyghurs how they feel about their government. Or they’re <10% of Chinese population so who cares, they don’t need democracy.

                • Brickardo@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  The US is effectively a one-party system as well, because the rest of the world gets fucked over either way you guys vote.

                  • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    3 months ago
                    1. I’m not a US citizen and I don’t remember mentioning it in this thread.

                    2. That’s not what one-party system means. The US is in principle a many-party system, but because of how their system works it means that voting anything that isn’t one of the 2 top parties means throwing away your vote. Making it a functionally 2-party system, which is way more democratic than a 1-party system.

    • callouscomic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Yes, his name was Andrew Jackson, and he told the Supreme Court to go fuck itself, and we survived him too. This stuff changes and evolves.

    • MajorSauce@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      America used to have a grand tradition of what to do with tyrants.

      Which is the same playbook as democratically elected leaders of foreign nations. Bombs, drones and CIA-soonsored assassinations