• 0 Posts
  • 24 Comments
Joined 5 days ago
cake
Cake day: April 7th, 2025

help-circle




  • Sure. And the US government has the CIA and military to enact that regime change. Plus they have all the cops and military to defend against a popular uprising overthrowing the government.

    I’m not saying it can’t be done, but we’re still in the early stages of a popular uprising. That’s what these protests are about. This one on Saturday got, reportedly, ~5 million people on the streets at the same time. That’s ~1.5% of the country’s population. According to the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict, it takes ~3.5% of the population mass mobilizing at the same time to effect political change. That’s ~12 million people. That’s why this wasn’t a 1 and done protest. The next one is already scheduled for April 19. And there will be another after that. And another after that.

    Let’s not just aim for 3.5%. Go higher. What can 5% of the country, 17 million people, do if we’re all out in the streets together? Rather than just complain that one single protest didn’t immediately result in widespread political change, why don’t you get out there and join us on the 19th? Bring your friends. Bring your family. Help make a change rather than just complaining that others aren’t doing it for you.




  • Mental asylums as they existed in the US before the 80s were often little more than glorified prisons. They did all kinds of horrific things to people which today we would consider torture.

    That said, most people (not all, but most) who were in mental asylums were there because they had very real issues they needed real treatment for. Most people were not getting the treatment they needed, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t need something.

    The mental asylums absolutely needed a lot of reform. Most probably did need to be shut down, or, at the very least, the entire staff needed to change and they needed a completely new philosophy of care. What this country absolutely did NOT need is to just throw all those people out onto the streets to fend for themselves. It seems to have been a lateral change for the people who needed help and a negative change for the rest of the country.

    I’m not sure I would use the term “mental asylum” as that has a lot of cultural connotations I don’t think we need or want to bother with. However, I do think the federal government should provide massive amounts of block grant funding to states to open new facilities which can provide inpatient services to people who suffer with mental health problems. These should be founded on a care-first framework, not the torture prisons of yore.




  • They can secede, with the consent of the other states (meaning an act of the Federal government).

    The general theory is that once a state enters into the Union it gains certain privileges and benefits which it would not previously had access to. Things like military protection, federal government investment, the increased power/influence in global politics/economics, etc, etc. Each state is getting things from other states and the federal government at the same time as they’re giving things in return. Since it’s a two-way relationship, it should take both parties to sever that relationship.

    It just seems wrong to me, kind of like not allowing divorces.

    I’d argue it’s more like requiring alimony after a divorce. When two people are married often one will put their career on hold or de-emphasize it in order to focus on other things to support the marriage (eg stay-at-home parent). When the couple then divorces, the courts recognize that the individual who put their career on hold is now at a sever disadvantage in that they have forgone however many years of experience, advancement, salary, etc. They can’t just jump back into the workforce and expect to get a job as good as if they had been working the whole time. And the other member of the relationship (the one who did not sacrifice their career) got the benefits of having someone to manage the home while they could focus on their career.

    So the court acknowledges this disparity in the relationship and will require the higher-paid member of the marriage to pay alimony payments to the other as a way to make up for that economic imbalance between them. The higher earning member of the marriage can’t just divorce and go about their way without having to compensate the other for the years they spent focusing on the family rather than their career.

    This is what the secession of a US state would look like in theory. We tried the whole “one side gets unilaterally decides to break up without mediation or compensation to the other” thing. It was the impetus for the bloodiest war in American history. In order to secede “the right way” (ie without bloodshed), a state would have to go to the Federal Government and ask to secede. The government (which is a collection of representatives of the states and people in the states) then debates and decides on terms.

    Of course, this has never been done or even tried. I suspect that pretty much every single state (except maybe California) would find that the benefits of staying in the Union far outweigh the benefits of leaving.






  • Is your argument is that anyone who is unwilling to nuke their entire life for the movement is insufficiently motivated and shouldn’t even bother getting involved?

    If that’s your stance, then you’re just plain wrong and you should probably keep quiet about it because your working against the movement.

    Vanguard revolutions don’t work. They just replace one set of shitty authoritarians with another. The ONLY way this can ever work is if we make the movement accessible to as broad a swath of people as humanly possible.

    I’ve been a political activist for 22 years now. I cut my teeth on the front lines of the anti-Iraq War movement in 2003. I was at Occupy. I spent my early-to-mid 20s with little regard for my personal safety and financial stability. But nobody keeps that up forever. I’m pretty sure I did it longer than most. But that’s not all I want from life.

    Yes, fighting fascism is important to protecting my kids’ future (I have 2 kids). You know what else is equally important to that, though? Making sure they have a stable home and food on their plates now. And I can’t do that if I nuke my life by spending every single day in the streets, losing my job, and getting arrested.

    My kids won’t have to ask me what I did because they’re there with me. Both my 3 yo and 5 yo were at the DC protest on Saturday. And this wasn’t either of their first action. My 5 yo was with us at the 2020 uprising when she was less than a year old.

    A successful movement takes all kinds. Yes, there are some who can take greater risks and more radical actions, but I’m not at that place in my life anymore and that’s fine. If we can’t find a way to include people who have other responsibilities in life, too, without insulting them or implying they’re not really interested in change, then the entire movement is cooked.

    So, thank you for your past service to the cause, but if you don’t have anything constructive to say, kindly fuck off.