• 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.