• purgegf [she/her]
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    incremental change doesn’t lead to revolution

    No, it doesn’t. I’m not saying it leads to a revolution at all. But there has been no incremental change the past 4 years. Only far-right extreme change and Americans dying by the thousands. A revolution is primed in either outcome.

    your opinion is American Stockholm Syndrome.

    It must be nice to not be a hostage. To not be a marginalized class. To not be repeatedly and personally threatened that you will be the first on the firing line, the first target of domestic terror. It must be nice.

    • RandomWords [he/him]
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      lol. probably neither outcome, but just based on the rubber band effect, a trump win has a higher chance of leading to a progressive winning in four years.

      edit: you're going to modify your comment to try to attack me after words? you're making a lot of assumptions about someone you don't know.

      • purgegf [she/her]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Like I implied in the earlier comment, there is a likelihood the rubber band is going to break before it gets to four years. It Can Happen Here.

        • RandomWords [he/him]
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 years ago

          so now we should 'vote for joe' to preserve the status quo? just garbage.

          • purgegf [she/her]
            ·
            4 years ago

            Where did I ever use the word "vote"? This whole conversation was about two hypothetical situations. You seem to be projecting here.

            • RandomWords [he/him]
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 years ago

              because you're heavily implying it by promoting incremental change and the status quo over people getting fed up and actually organizing.

              • purgegf [she/her]
                ·
                4 years ago

                Uh no? You should read this comment thread again. I discussed two outcomes of the election and how people may respond to either. I laid out objective practicalities of how those outcomes may affect people. I pointed out that one of those has an objectively bad possibility. You seem to be conflating that with me “promoting” or urging a “vote” one way or another.

                • RandomWords [he/him]
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  My issue with that is, assuming a proper revolution gets underway, any number of fail-conditions on that path will result in an American Theocratic Facist state

                  And that it occurring under “incremental change bullshit” has a less risky chance of working.

                  there is a likelihood the rubber band is going to break before it gets to four years. It Can Happen Here.

                  sorry for the wrongful deduction. guess i'm reading between the lines a bit too much.

                  • purgegf [she/her]
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    Yep. Glad we cleared that up. (Unless you are being sarcastic. Really, those are neutral objective observations that can be for or against. You don't have to try to project this hard.)

                    • RandomWords [he/him]
                      ·
                      4 years ago

                      the idea that everything has to be some sort of projection, when weighed against someone implying something they didn't intend to imply is a whole different conversation.