- cross-posted to:
- news@endlesstalk.org
- cross-posted to:
- news@endlesstalk.org
You must log in or # to comment.
Beginning to question the inherent wisdom of “Normal transition of power” when Biden handed the keys of the kingdom to a guy who openly planned to lock all the doors and shoot the next guy elected to walk through them.
But hey, I guess it would have been against the rules not to meekly empower a fascist dictatorship.
I hope you are being cheeky by saying ‘beginning to’, it was immensely obvious this was the plan going back to, at bare minimum, about a year before the election, when Trump just kept saying he was gonna serve 3 terms, his supporters wouldn’t have to vote again, etc.
I disagree with Biden’s handling of the transition, but it’s definitely internally consistent with his beliefs. He really, really wanted the global rule of law to work.
I would not be surprised if part of the intention here was to maintain legitimacy during the initial transfer, so that when the monsters refuse to do the same, it will lend legitimacy to a global response to assist the people in reclaiming their democracy.
Now, you could also call that ‘passing the buck’ and… Well, yes. He did seem to do too much of that, imo. Or not enough, depending on how you look at it.
He really, really wanted the global rule of law to work.
No, Biden did not. He actively broke it by financing Israel’s genocide against international and domestic law.
You’re right, that was awful and idealogically-rooted behavior justified in the name of liberal statecraft.
US support of Israel is a huge problem, and needs to stop. I am with you, and he should be held accountable for the part he played in that.
He really, really wanted the global rule of law to work.
Hence backing Al Qaeda in Syria, fleecing Afghanistan of it’s currency reserves to kick off a famine, propping up a military dictatorship in The Philippines, all while continuing a 70 year old illegal blockade of Cuba? Never even mind the Holocaust in Gaza.
Come on, dude. The US has always been playing Calvinball with Rule of Law. If Biden made noises about it, that’s just him delivering the company line one last time to the liberal rubes.
when the monsters refuse to do the same, it will lend legitimacy to a global response to assist the people in reclaiming their democracy.
That’s pure cope.
Biden bent over backwards for the Silicon Valley mega-donors practically from day one, and they took full advantage until he was used up and disposed of.
He wasn’t secretly plotting a resistance movement, he was carving up the country in advance so that Trump could sell it off easier.
To clarify, I am not a Biden supporter by any means. In fact, I place a lot of the blame for the fucked state of the world right now squarely on his shoulders. It would not be a stretch to say that I harbor a deep resentment for the man’s work.
However, I do think there’s a lot to learn from his career. Because as far as I can tell, the man genuinely seemed to be trying to improve the world for the average person. Thus, he clearly fucked up catastrophically, and there’s a lot to learn from how and why.
The US disregard of the Rule of Law historically seemed to be one of his personal bugbears. At least from what I’ve seen of his accounts and those around them. I won’t judge you if you want to discard him as a bumbling hypocrite, but we can learn the most from failure.
Removed by mod
I love these comments that always place the blame on Biden, instead of you know, the actual fucking fascists. JFC.
I think it is because you can’t reason with these idiot fascists, but we could have reasoned with Biden.
biden was happy as long as netanyahu was happy.
“How dare you break the laws - we should have broken the laws to stop you from breaking the laws.”
All Biden needed to do was have Trump assassinated - as an official presidential action, it would have been perfectly legal according to Trump’s precedent.
Follow that up with a “Y’all see why this is maybe not the greatest idea to give the ol’ prez this much power? Repeal it, then I’ma fuck off to some beach somewhere.”
Boom. Democracy saved, all without breaking the law.
Not sure I get it, but user name do indeed check out.
Probably the pertinent bit: “Sulla revived the office of dictator, which had been dormant since the Second Punic War, over a century before. He used his powers to purge his opponents (“Sulla’s proscription”), and reform Roman constitutional laws, to restore the primacy of the Senate and limit the power of the tribunes of the plebs. Resigning his dictatorship in 79 BC, Sulla retired to private life and died the following year. Later political leaders such as Julius Caesar followed the precedent set by Sulla with his military coup to attain political power through force.”
Dude made himself dictator, reformed laws, purged his political rivals then gave it all up to go live in his villa once he felt he’d achieved his goals of putting the republic back on the rails. Julius Caesar later remarked that the one mistake Sulla made was that he gave up the power he had seized.
Oh gotcha. Guess I skimmed right passed that bit. But yeah, pretty much that exactly, except the whole dictator can of worms is already open.
This, but unironically.
What a stupid argument. Like Biden refusing to cede power to an elected opponent wouldn’t be one of the largest abuses of power in US history.
It would.
It would also be several orders of magnitude less harmful than everything Trump’s done.
OMG no 🤣. It would have sent the nation into chaos!
Which would have been several orders of magnitude less harmful than everything Trump has done (which includes sending the nation into chaos anyway).
blue maga is ridiculous. 🙄
How would it have been breaking the law? According to the Supreme Court long before the election, any act a President does while in office is legal.
Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right, and just because it’s illegal doesn’t mean that it’s the right thing to do. It’s illegal to donate or hand out food from your garden to the homeless - as pertains to the law stating that it’s illegal to provide a better service than the government.
Uh huh.
It’s a civil war.
I wish, but I don’t have faith that enough liberal interests will give a shit. They’ve done little to stand against fascism and have sided with corporate interests every time.
All it takes is 3%. We have the people.
3% for what? Where did that number even come from?
3% of the population fought in the revolutionary war. It only takes 3% of a population to get things going.
The question really is what % of the army will support Trump. They already made sure that the top brass is full of Trump loyalists.
That was a very weird article…
To the point I googled the source and apparently it’s a 90 year old Maxist-Leninist newspaper. Which kind of explains the writing style and lack of sources.
They do have “left” lean, but it always feels off because those people also are super into authoritarianism. So it’s less about presenting enough for someone to understand and form an opinion, and more like telling their readers an opinion along with a few facts that were found after the fact to be used to defend it.
To be clear; Trump’s 1500% going to try and steal the election, but everyone already knows that. There is zero new information on the article and I’m pretty sure everyone that didn’t vote for trump has came to the same conclusion…
Marxist/Leninists writing just always gives me something like the uncanny valley feeling. I don’t care how it’s dressed up, or if the person speaking/writing agrees with my existing opinion, I can’t fucking stand them. I guess it’s “the ick”
Better sources have been covering all of this for months already.
Can you link the better sources? After a skim for sources I found 7, is that not enough for you for a short article?
The two big things it references:
Save act:
The SAVE Act would require that individuals registering to vote show “documentary proof of United States citizenship,” including when they re-register after moving to a new state.
https://www.factcheck.org/2025/02/will-save-act-prevent-married-women-from-registering-to-vote/
And an EO from 3/25 (that they didn’t provide the name of:
President Donald Trump on Tuesday signed a sweeping executive action to overhaul U.S. elections, including requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections and demanding that all ballots be received by Election Day
https://apnews.com/live/donald-trump-news-updates-3-25-2025
They both do the same thing, and happened months ago…
But to be fair, I often overestimate how much a random person remembers. They’re not wrong with their opinion on what all this means.
It’s just the way they present it often feels too much like trump for the average person to listen.
Because of all the reasons I said in the last comment.
The ratio of sourced content to editorial rant is just too low. You have to really be committed to go through the article to figure out concretely what the hell they are taking about. Most of it is just reiterating how outrageous it is and how an alphabet soup of leftist organizations are either outages or should be outraged, and a vague list of the measures that are outrageous that is mostly focused on why it is outrageous rather than what the actual measures are. It eventually does concretely describe two things, the id requirement and the voting infrastructure audits, but that’s a tiny fraction of the article.
Good news, you’ll never have to feel the ick of an equitable economy or being part of a society that prioritizes the wellbeing of its citizenry over GDP here in the west.
Phew amirite? Enjoy capitalist paradise! Participation is voluntary*
*voluntary participation subject to dying in the gutter of exposure and capital defense force brutality if poor citizen fails to volunteer for capitalist exploitation. The owner class reserves all rights to kill you anyway if you threaten quarterly earnings estimates such as drawing on Healthcare benefits you paid into when you need to use them.
Nah. I’m an actual communist
My policy positions make Vladimir Lenin look like Hillary Clinton.
My problem with Marxist-Leninists, is the authoritarianism, which is the worst part about trump too.
Does it make sense now?
I think authoritarianism is bad, and even if an authoritarian agrees with me on every aspect of policy, I’ll never be on their side.
It’s a difference at a fundamental level.
Quick edit:
As simple as possible, they topped out at what people need to survive, a giant population of people getting just enough to live and work, to support a ruling class of politicians who were essentially oligarchs.
I think everyone should have enough to be comfortable because without that life is still miserable for 99.99% of the population, it’s switching out one ruling class for another.
That’s not a win, it’s not changing the game. It’s shuffling the cards and playing the same game we know isn’t good.
Anything like anarcho-syndicalism?
Not even sure what that is, but anyone wanti g anarchism likely doesn’t know what that means.
Like, if there’s anarcho-luddittes out there who thinks we should completely destroy society and go back to living in the forest in tribes of ~150 people…
I wouldnt agree with them that it’s the best path, but I wouldn’t consider them hypocritical because at least they understand where anarchism would lead and are being honest about it
For everything else with “anarcho” tacked on the front, I feel it’s safe to say I’d disagree with them without looking into what they’re about.
I did go ahead and Google that before hitting reply, just to be safe since I honestly hadn’t heard that term before.
And that’s just putting trade unions in charge, which would end up the same as any other ruling class.
I’m saying there shouldn’t be a ruling class at all.
Claims to be a communist, but has no clue about anarchists. Many of whom are actual communist/Marxist. Sure buddy, you’re a super mega communist.
Anarcho-syndicalism advocates for a society without hierarchical structures, achieved through the power of worker-led trade unions BTW.
Oh yes that old capitalist Chestnut smearing the ludites. Very communist of you. Do you know who the Luddites were? How based they were? Do you understand how badly we actually need luddites right now?
You would really do yourself a service, not by reading dense tomes of theory. But by reading a few freaking basic paragraphs of description on a Wikipedia page.
Thank you for taking up this discussion. I am not able to make long posts at this time. I appreciate you.
Anarcho-syndicalism advocates for a society without hierarchical structures
No, it replaces what’s currently at the top with a trade union…
Something where people vote for their leaders. It would be the same as we have now almost immediately.
Are you even in a union? Do you have any idea how they work or how often corrupt assholes get leadership positions for the sole purpose of personally enriching themselves?
Like, I know I just said that I’m aware I underestimate others but…
C’mon man, you legitimately don’t understand how that would result in a system identical to any other party based political system?
You don’t understand how fast they’d throw their origins out the window?
No, it replaces what’s currently at the top with a trade union.
Something where people vote for their leaders. It would be the same as we have now almost immediately.
Even if it did it would literally be better than what we have now. But no that’s incorrect. It’s literally about doing away with what is considered the top. And replacing it with local answerable flat representation. Using the power of labor and the Unions to achieve that for Syndicalists. Or by other means for the other subset of anarchists, direct action etc.
Are you even in a union?
SEIU, mother was with the teamsters and my father with the pipelines.
Do you have any idea how they work or how often corrupt assholes get leadership positions for the sole purpose of personally enriching themselves?
Yes, and? So are you advocating to abolish unions just like the capitalists? Not even the nutty Leninist do that. They just rig things to get their puppets in place. Corruption can happen anywhere, with anyone. Corruption isn’t an inherent feature of unions.
Like, I know I just said that I’m aware I underestimate others but…
C’mon man, you legitimately don’t understand how that would result in a system identical to any other party based political system?
You don’t understand how fast they’d throw their origins out the window?
You don’t underestimate others. You far overestimate yourself. The whole point of anarchism. From the most extreme to the most milquetoast. Is literally doing away with those unanswerable hierarchy protected leaders. Flat, local, minimal governance of the consenting. Nothing more, nothing less.
It’s got nothing to do with your other straw man of destroying society. Nothing at all. It’s about not having a fascistic national federal government forcing their whims down your throat through a monopoly on violence. It’s about some shit head governor who’s never been to your town and doesn’t give a shit about your town not being able to do the same to your town. It’s about those who actually use the means of production having a say on them. It’s about you and your neighbors deciding the rules you live by. And not someone that you have no say in at the state or federal level.
If you actually were a communist, you’d understand this. Especially if you were anti-authoritarian. Most anti-authoritarian communist realistically are going to tend to align anarcho communist. The sad thing is though. I think you are actually capable of understanding this. But contrary to the username you’ve chosen you actually just don’t give a shit.
My problem with Marxist-Leninists, is the authoritarianism
So you’re an “actual communist” who never bothered to actually read anything Marx or Engels wrote.
deleted by creator
The article says the constitution say a president can’t change voting rules, but this president has the house, the senate and the judges.
Which he probably only has control of because of voter fraud
True, but now who’s going to do anything about it?
States control voting so he’s going to have a fight in at least some of them.
Yeah but how many does it actually take?
He doesn’t give a shit about the constitution. He’ll just have the slimy ratfucks around him sort it out and then take all the credit for it. It’ll be a “big, beautiful amendment” or some dumb shit that both amuses the smooth-brained among us and gives the media phrase they’ll parrot with zero irony or pushback.
Anyone who is surprised hasn’t been paying attention.
I’m surprised it took them a few months to realise, it was obvious since before the election
I believe this is right, I am never surprised by this, for Trump anything is possible
Buy guns. Buy ammo. Help others acquire guns and ammo.
Train. Help others train.
Form networks.
If you are at all surprised by this I got some beach front property in Montana to sell you.
Give it a few decades and you might actually have that.
Thank you tankies for putting your feelings above the national grave threat all to feel morally superior.
I don’t see how tankies are to blame for the overwhelming majority of our country’s most powerful people deciding that they support a fascist coup.
Even if we pretend that 2024 was a free and fair election, the electorates that could’ve swung it weren’t bastions of non-voting authoritarian socialists.
You know that are other countries in the world right? And now the MAJORITY of the countries in the world hate the US?
So… yes my feelings are above your pathetic puppet state and I feel way way morally superior than bombing civilians and blackmail the world into agreeing with me. Yes.
You’re welcome.
You mean the rest of the world that’s looking at the genocide and saying, “That’s tragic. Oh well?”
Get over yourself you ignorant child.
No, only the few key politicians that Israel/US are blackmailing say “Oh, well” while everyone else is against it.
Americans elected repeatedly pro-Israeli candidates, last election was between “we commit genocide in the open” and “we secretly commit genocide, you will sleep well tho”. Brave country.
More like we don’t approve of genocide in bombing and displacing civilians versus we approve of genocide by actively starving them out.
Kinda a big difference. One could at least give push back versus the other who tactidly supports this kind of gross behavior.
More like we don’t approve of genocide in bombing and displacing civilians
Well this wasn’t the her stance Ahahah She did approved it, just with longer, quieter action.
The difference between Rep and Dem in america is the exactly the same as left and right wing Zionism. Just switch jews with christians.
But ok, let’s pretend I agree. Can you give me one example where a Democrat President pushed back the Zionist project? (JFK is not valid) *with concrete results, not just words
- Obama pushing for Palestinian state. Netanyahu was so threatened by non capitualtion that he attended Republican shit and campaigned for his interests in congress.
Oh… he attended an event, what a brave concrete result. So concrete that now we have a Palestinian state right? …Right?
Thats all? Surely these very democratic and highly moral politicians have shown empathy for the Palestinians. You wouldn’t support them if they didn’t have a track record of mercy, kindness and empathy.
Like Obama, in Iraq, was such a nice dude, so chill, nothing like those pesky republicans 🤮Its incredible we did manage to move his soul and prevent a massacre right?
“tankie” truly does just mean “anyone to the left of the Democrats”
by tankie you mean Kamala Harris and the DNC?
What do you mean “revealed” as if this is news? I thought this was the plan the whole fucking time.
They were revealed in 2021.
Arguably as early as 2016.
What is in this article that we didn’t already know? Is there any new legislation in process of being passed? This just sounds like the same playbook we used for the 2024 election to me.
Fucking Russia and CCP run China in the USA. That is some 3rd World crap right there and the Blue States should tell Canada to annex them ASAP.
You deserve it
Link seems to be broken for me…
Fixed
Not sure how much I can trust that source. And no right-winger will ever accept it either.
Anyone with a more direct link to a source about this?
Agreed, that article was kind of a mess., and you really have to already agree with it to stay along for the ride. Even as someone who shares their general perspective, I can’t help but to get the same vibe as I do reading unhinged conservative outlets, just from a different side. The wiring style evokes a feeling more of unsubstantiated unhinged conspiracy theory than a concrete writeup.
A lot of time is spent name dropping organizations and you have to already know them to have any idea why you might want to care about them, but not saying concretely what exactly it is, just that it is hard right nonsense that every acronym they can mention is outraged over. They even name drop the UAW in a way that lets them type it in but without citing then on the actual current reality, because the UAW hasn’t really come out against Trump.
When it gets to describing the actual “plan”, it mostly still didn’t explain exactly what it is talking about. It eventually gets to concretely mentioning two precise things, the requirement to prove citizenship in way that may be disproportionately difficult for people who had a name change, and an onerous voting certification. The rest of the elements are left too vague to try to understand.
This article may help keep up the attention and energy of folks already keeping up with this stuff, but anyone vaguely on a fence won’t make it through the first paragraph without getting a bit skeptical, and almost certainly won’t make it to the meat of the article before giving up and moving on to other articles.
Funny, the moment I read ‘radical right’ I got the exact same sense you did.
Requiring ID to be able to vote should not be a hot take
It’s roughly how it works elsewhere. I was surprised to see that you don’t need an id or a document to vote there.
Yeah, I don’t get that one either. Granted, I’m not registered or ever plan to vote unless/until direct democracy exists, but how do they determine if you’re in the right district, precinct, etc. without confirming your identity? I would think that making sure people are doing things correctly and fairly would be a thing most people that aren’t trying to cheat the system would want.
It’s because we don’t have a FREE federal ID. There is no mechanism by which someone with no money can get any identification paperwork. If that were possible, I agree requiring an ID would be good, but until then it just weeds out the poorest.
Sorry but as you are a non-voter, your opinion doesn’t matter.
You could be drawing the most detailed genitalia on your voting ballot, but you’ve missed some hairy opportunities, I feel sorry for you man/ma’am
Because it’s a barrier to voting that disproportionately disadvantages poor people.
Then give out ids for free.
Firstly, free anything sounds very un-american.
More generally though, that doesn’t really solve the problem.
People living in poverty often just don’t have the time, access, and / or mental acuity to attend to this type of personal administration stuff.
If you’re living hand-to-mouth, it’s just not a priority… you can’t eat your ID.
If you don’t have a home it may be difficult to obtain an ID, and if you have one it might be difficult to keep it.
I’m not registered or ever plan to vote unless/until direct democracy exists,
Fucking stupid
