That you believe what was essentially a glorified temper tantrum — and yes, a temper tantrum. I'm aware that people died. Countless people die everyday across the world to gratify the needs and fickle temperament of the United States, — in support of the incumbent President was anything resembling the 'state actively being overthrown' by fascists is utterly inane.
A coup d'etat is an seizure of power, and there was no instant where any of the participating parties came close to claiming control of any government apparatus.
There was no seizure of infrastructure, such as streets or railroads or communication hubs.
There was no subduing or defection of armed bodies; the whole farce was broken up by nightfall by riot cops.
There was no provisions or organization whatsoever for instituting a new government.
It was an utterly farcical affair that only came to fruition by the implicit enabling of the country's leader and it's majority party to drum up enthusiasm among their constituents , which was promptly dispersed virtually without difficulty the moment it was deemed they became a bit too rowdy and completely disavowed.
The narrative of 'WE ALMOST LITERALLY HAD A FASCIST DICTATORSHIP' is useful for liberals like you, because it permits you to frame a utterly heinous institution that is responsible for a multitude of actual fascist coups that have killed millions of people across the world as a sort of victim and imply we should have gratitude for it's continued existence.
That you believe what was essentially a glorified temper tantrum — and yes, a temper tantrum
Just gonna go ahead and downplay the threat of fascist violence in the name of white supremacy. Probably because you're a white kid yourself.
A coup d’etat is an seizure of power
You don't know what an autogolpe is. You need to look that shit up. One branch of government sent a violent mob of off-duty cops and militarized sympathizers to overthrow another branch of government.
That's not a temper-tantrum.
The narrative of ‘WE ALMOST LITERALLY HAD A FASCIST DICTATORSHIP’ is useful for liberals like you, because it permits you to frame a utterly heinous institution that is responsible for a multitude of actual fascist coups that have killed millions of people across the world as a sort of victim and imply we should have gratitude for it’s continued existence
I can fucking hear your whiteness from here. If you are okay with a liberal institution falling into avowed fascists hands, then I genuinely question your solidarity with the communities you claim to be in alliance with. I am perfectly capable of critiquing the liberal state while also not wanting to see it seized by a burgeoning fascist movement. Apparently that's too heavy a lift for you, though
Just gonna go ahead and downplay the threat of fascist violence in the name of white supremacy. Probably because you’re a white kid yourself.
I'm a POC. Fortunately, I'm entirely accustomed to being condescended to by liberals or I might be a bit annoyed.
You don’t know what an autogolpe is. You need to look that shit up. One branch of government sent a violent mob of off-duty cops and militarized sympathizers to overthrow another branch of government.
Once again, there was no element of even an attempt to tangibly seize control of any lever of power whatsoever. It isn't a videogame or a movie where occupying a building grants you control over a country of over three hundred million people.
That’s not a temper-tantrum.
Yeah, it is. We just live in a country where the temper-tantrums of white petit-bourgeoisie over electoralism results in death.
I can fucking hear your whiteness from here. If you are okay with a liberal institution falling into avowed fascists hands, then I genuinely question your solidarity with the communities you claim to be in alliance with. I am perfectly capable of critiquing the liberal state while also not wanting to see it seized by a burgeoning fascist movement. Apparently that’s too heavy a lift for you, though
Imagine being this much of a racist prick, lmao. You think AOC and Ilhan are 'darlings of the left,' trip all yourself idolizing cops saving 'our representation' and 'our' government (don't laugh!) and your account history is full of liberal apologism.
Once again, there was no element of even an attempt to tangibly seize control of any lever of power whatsoever. It isn’t a videogame or a movie where occupying a building grants you control over a country of over three hundred million people.
Their objective was to force legislators to overrule the counting of the vote . They wanted to force Pence to ignore the votes by threatening to execute him. It may not have been a good plan, but it was a plan. The hard-right does not need the same level of strategic planning to hold on to power as the left needs to seize power. They don't need to seize airwaves or infrastructure because they were simply attempting to hold on to power. This is the key difference between a traditional coup and an autogolpe
Imagine being this much of a racist prick, lmao.
I'm hispanic, but whatever. I'm not the one minimizing the very real and imminent threat of white-supremacist violence that is mainstreaming into American consciousness.
You think AOC and Ilhan are ‘darlings of the left’ and your account history is full of liberal apologism.
They are darlings of the left that is still interested in participating in electoral politics. You're on a message board of a podcast that went hard in the paint for Bernie...which, last time I checked, was participating in electoral politics.
So, uhh....having a hard time hearing your criticisms of revolutionary action and taking it seriously, especially when that criticism involves downplaying the threat of (dis)organized right-wing violence.
And my post history is not liberal apologia...in fact, the only time I ever come around these boards anymore is when I am concerned about the fascist apologia that is radiating from members who claim to be left who want to hand-wave away growing fascist violence.
Their objective was to force legislators to overrule the counting of the vote . They wanted to force Pence to ignore the votes by threatening to execute him. It may not have been a good plan, but it was a plan. The hard-right does not need the same level of strategic planning to hold on to power as the left needs to seize power. They don’t need to seize airwaves or infrastructure because they were simply attempting to hold on to power.
It was a physically impossible plan that failed miserably at the first hurdle, and there's absolutely no valuable utility in portraying members of organs responsible for abetting and enforcing far-right nationalism and capitalist hegemony as heroically preventing a fascist coup.
So, uhh…having a hard time hearing your criticisms of revolutionary action and taking it seriously, especially when that criticism involves downplaying the threat of (dis)organized right-wing violence.
Having a hard time taking you seriously as a person after reveling in calling me, a (half) black person, a 'white kid' and claiming you could 'smell my whiteness' after lodging issue with your absurd narrative and lionizing of the governmental organs responsible for untold oppression on people who look like me, then shrugging it off with 'I'm hispanic, whatever.'
And my post history is not liberal apologia…in fact, the only time I ever come around these boards anymore is when I am concerned about the fascist apologia that is radiating from members who claim to be left who want to hand-wave away growing fascist violence.
Where's all your posts bringing attention to the underreported lynchings of black men in the wake of the George Floyd protests? Or the executions of demonstrators after Ferguson? Or do all the theatrics only come out to lament the 'threat' posed to the imperialist superpower and it's government?
It was a physically impossible plan that failed miserably at the first hurdle
This is irrelevant. They still had a plan. It failed. Hence it was a failed autogolpe. History is littered with failed seizures of power, and they are often followed up with successful seizures of power if not properly addressed.
and there’s absolutely no valuable utility in portraying members of organs responsible for abetting and enforcing far-right nationalism and capitalist hegemony as heroically preventing a fascist coup.
Even within your own language you use the term fascist coup. That should be a tell. You can be opposed to fascism and also be opposed to the policing
Having a hard time taking you seriously as a person after reveling in calling me, a (half) black person, a ‘white kid’ and claiming you could ‘smell my whiteness’ ....
Look, I have no idea what you look like, and I don't really care. All I know is that you seem to be downplaying the threat of white-nationalist violence and equating it with meaningless temper tantrums for some reason. Fine. Whatever. You can downplay it if you want, but I'm not about to make that mistake.
Where’s all your posts bringing attention to the underreported lynchings of black men in the wake of the George Floyd protests? Or the executions of demonstrators after Ferguson? Or do all the theatrics only come out to lament the ‘threat’ posed to the imperialist superpower and it’s government?
Seriously, dude? Is your knock on me that I don't post enough? Is my posting volume not up to your standards? Have I not logged enough posts to be taken seriously? My very first response that set off this entire shit-show chain of events I acknowledge and oppose how policing is a form of enforcing the interests of capital and white supremacy. But I guess I'm sorry if I don't have chapo receipts from events that happened before this website was even online.
The president sabotaging response while the congressional police refuse to protect congress could easily have lead to actual murders or other attacks on congress.
At that point it's a massive state of emergency and trump is still the guy in charge.
It was a coup attempt. Coups fail all the fucking time.
For the sake of the people spectating, let me explain why I'm arguing this and why it's important.
There is a fundamental misunderstanding of what Fascism's role is and how it relates to the current situation.
Fascism is not an ideology that is independent of or diametrically composed to liberalism; rather it's a mechanism of capital to be leveraged by the bourgeoisie to supplement their hegemony and serve as a bulwark against leftism. It is not a genuinely popular movement, but masquerades as one. It adopts the trappings of one and often co-opts leftist rhetoric but it is incapable of, materially or ideologically, sustaining any sort of insurrection against the bourgeoisie state because it supports the bourgeoisie state and thus cannot nor does it have any interest in popular uprising.
Fascists can only take power by grafting themselves onto — and not usurping — existing institutions, often with the support of the bourgeoisie if not directly installed by them. We see this example in Hitler's Germany, who was funded by the billion by industrialists and permitted into government as Chancellor for fear of the KDP, Italy where Mussolini came into power by coalition government and instituted the typical bourgeoisie-friendly economic policies under the auspices of a liberal financial advisor, Japan, Chile and the Chicago boys, etc.
Premature Fascist attempts at violent seizures of power would miserably fail, only for them to get remarkably lenient treatment and be gradually reintroduced to combat leftism. The SDP, that unleashed the Freikorps on the Spartakists, would ban the German Communist Party's paramilitary wing and very soon after lift Hitler's ban on public speaking. Liberals will show disgust to Fascism, but always side with them against socialism because their common interest and purpose is the preservation of the propertied classes.
This is also why you see the Proud Boys and other similar groups cooperating with police officers in protests — again, despite the occasional rhetoric effort at portraying themselves as against government overreach — because they're an auxiliary of the bourgeois state and far from being able to supplant it, cannot exist without it. It is the bourgeois media that platforms it's adherents, again feigning disgust but we know perfectly well that they're more than capable of completely blocking out anything they actually don't want people to hear about like Modi's prosecution of Muslims and the newest pink wave in South America, and lavish money upon their figureheads.
The reactionaries were called to the capitol and enabled merely to serve their utility for intimidation and the stirring of fervor and passion in the Republican base. These reactionaries acted too prematurely, were promptly disavowed and dispersed without difficulty — and again, as usual, with practically a slap on the wrist because the bourgeois still has use for them.
The issue with the narrative of a credible Fascist coup getting fended off is that it implies that they exist as an independent and opposed force to the American state and liberalism, and they do not. It implies that the American bourgeois republic is something that is a 'better' alternative to Fascism, when the reality is that these reactionary nationalists are an vital instrument that helps to guarantee the survival of the capital and the bourgeois republic. If they posed any genuine threat to the current order, if Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi truly believed these people were actually an dangerous threat to their livelihoods and safeties, then there would have been a thorough investigation and purging of all responsible parties and organs. But there wasn't, because they're not — they're useful.
I am not understating the threat of Fascism or white nationalists. They are dangerous and I know this very well — My mother's birth certificate lists her race as 'negro' and I live not very far away from places where black men were lynched and transgender black women were killed last year in response to the George Floyd protests — but they cannot be effectively combated if we cannot recognize their actual nature and how they operate as a component in capital's myriad methods of hegemony.
At the risk of being labelled a debate guy I'm gonna talk about a couple of things you said.
A coup d’etat is an seizure of power, and there was no instant where any of the participating parties came close to claiming control of any government apparatus.
That explicitly wasn't the goal. Look at what Yeltsin did to Russia, parliament was opposed to him so he got rid of the parliament. These people weren't trying to form a new government they were trying to empower Trump.
There was no subduing or defection of armed bodies; the whole farce was broken up by nightfall by riot cops.
There was though. There was deliberate actions taken by the capitol police, there was actions taken to delay response.
Considering their goal (as much as they had a goal) seems to be hostages and/or murder I think the sabotaged police response is extremely relevant and is probably the best argument for what makes this a legitimate attack vs a riot.
The narrative of ‘WE ALMOST LITERALLY HAD A FASCIST DICTATORSHIP’ is useful for liberals like you, because it permits you to frame a utterly heinous institution that is responsible for a multitude of actual fascist coups that have killed millions of people across the world as a sort of victim and imply we should have gratitude for it’s continued existence.
As much as we all shit on Amerikkka we should also acknowledge that collapse of America is likely to lead to immense amounts of suffering and death.
Acknowledging the attack for what it was cuts both ways. You can't insult people and call them libs and misrepresent their arguments while also refusing to actually do any real analysis of the situation. I don't think many (any?) are doing lib shit like claiming PTSD or demanding terrorism charges for everyone involved.
If they came through the right door and found someone like Omar, Tlaib, AOC, Bernie, etc... they probably kill them. Probably in horrific fashion with the entire country watching. I don't think it should be swept aside as lib shit, even though I think the democrats are and will handle it in awful fashion.
I hope you wouldn't be labeled a debate guy for elaborating on request, haha.
That explicitly wasn’t the goal. Look at what Yeltsin did to Russia, parliament was opposed to him so he got rid of the parliament. These people weren’t trying to form a new government they were trying to empower Trump.
Yeltsin had control of the military, state media and etc. Some of the most fierce fighting (which would result in well over a hundred dead) occurred for control over a TV media complex which would play a crucial role in broadcasting pro-Yeltsin propaganda throughout the ordeal and Yeltsin's forces would end up besieging barricading, seizing bridges to ensure lockdown and etc.
Whether it's a autogolpe or coup d'etat, any meaningful attempt at seizing power actually requires an meaningful attempt at seizing power.
There was though. There was deliberate actions taken by the capitol police, there was actions taken to delay response.
Considering their goal (as much as they had a goal) seems to be hostages and/or murder I think the sabotaged police response is extremely relevant and is probably the best argument for what makes this a legitimate attack vs a riot.
It was absolutely an legitimate attack. What I'm saying and explained in my post above is that the idea that this was an genuine, as in with any remotely coherent plan or chance at success, attempt to overthrow the state/American government by an force that is opposed to is a fundamental misunderstanding of American reactionaries and their role.
As much as we all shit on Amerikkka we should also acknowledge that collapse of America is likely to lead to immense amounts of suffering and death.
The continued existence of America leads to immense amounts of suffering and death, not only as a imperialist superpower responsible for upholding an hegemony that results in the preventable deaths of tens of millions every year but the inherent utter unsustainability of it's system both economically and geologically means that it's collapse and the consequences are also inevitable. There's no sense in subscribing to revolutionary communism if you reject the circumstances that would actually grant an opportunity for revolution.
Acknowledging the attack for what it was cuts both ways. You can’t insult people and call them libs and misrepresent their arguments while also refusing to actually do any real analysis of the situation. I don’t think many (any?) are doing lib shit like claiming PTSD or demanding terrorism charges for everyone involved.
Is this not 'real analysis?' https://hexbear.net/post/82941/comment/897804
If they came through the right door and found someone like Omar, Tlaib, AOC, Bernie, etc… they probably kill them. Probably in horrific fashion with the entire country watching. I don’t think it should be swept aside as lib shit, even though I think the democrats are and will handle it in awful fashion.
All these people will approve budget bills that fund drone strikes on weddings, hospitals and orphanages. None of the resulting massacred peasant tenant farmers or guest workers will receive remotely the same attention precisely because they don't have cameras and the eyes of an entire country upon them.
The continued existence of America leads to immense amounts of suffering and death, not only as a imperialist superpower responsible for upholding an hegemony that results in the preventable deaths of tens of millions every year but the inherent utter unsustainability of it’s system both economically and geologically means that it’s collapse and the consequences are also inevitable. There’s no sense in subscribing to revolutionary communism if you reject the circumstances that would actually grant an opportunity for revolution.
We don't have the systems in place to deal with a revolutionary situation, which means we can't possibly win.
The problem is that Americas collapse could have almost unimaginable negative consequences for humanity, and those odds go way up when the only people with a platform or a base are insane reactionaries.
Maybe I am not a US citizen, so why the fuck would I care about an utopian situation in which the US is socialist when that isn't about to happen? Till then ACAB, till then I will warn against fascists and still jump with joy if the right persons die (of Coronavirus).
That you believe what was essentially a glorified temper tantrum — and yes, a temper tantrum. I'm aware that people died. Countless people die everyday across the world to gratify the needs and fickle temperament of the United States, — in support of the incumbent President was anything resembling the 'state actively being overthrown' by fascists is utterly inane.
A coup d'etat is an seizure of power, and there was no instant where any of the participating parties came close to claiming control of any government apparatus.
There was no seizure of infrastructure, such as streets or railroads or communication hubs.
There was no subduing or defection of armed bodies; the whole farce was broken up by nightfall by riot cops.
There was no provisions or organization whatsoever for instituting a new government.
It was an utterly farcical affair that only came to fruition by the implicit enabling of the country's leader and it's majority party to drum up enthusiasm among their constituents , which was promptly dispersed virtually without difficulty the moment it was deemed they became a bit too rowdy and completely disavowed.
The narrative of 'WE ALMOST LITERALLY HAD A FASCIST DICTATORSHIP' is useful for liberals like you, because it permits you to frame a utterly heinous institution that is responsible for a multitude of actual fascist coups that have killed millions of people across the world as a sort of victim and imply we should have gratitude for it's continued existence.
Just gonna go ahead and downplay the threat of fascist violence in the name of white supremacy. Probably because you're a white kid yourself.
You don't know what an autogolpe is. You need to look that shit up. One branch of government sent a violent mob of off-duty cops and militarized sympathizers to overthrow another branch of government.
That's not a temper-tantrum.
I can fucking hear your whiteness from here. If you are okay with a liberal institution falling into avowed fascists hands, then I genuinely question your solidarity with the communities you claim to be in alliance with. I am perfectly capable of critiquing the liberal state while also not wanting to see it seized by a burgeoning fascist movement. Apparently that's too heavy a lift for you, though
I'm a POC. Fortunately, I'm entirely accustomed to being condescended to by liberals or I might be a bit annoyed.
Once again, there was no element of even an attempt to tangibly seize control of any lever of power whatsoever. It isn't a videogame or a movie where occupying a building grants you control over a country of over three hundred million people.
Yeah, it is. We just live in a country where the temper-tantrums of white petit-bourgeoisie over electoralism results in death.
Imagine being this much of a racist prick, lmao. You think AOC and Ilhan are 'darlings of the left,' trip all yourself idolizing cops saving 'our representation' and 'our' government (don't laugh!) and your account history is full of liberal apologism.
Go back to /r/neoliberal.
Their objective was to force legislators to overrule the counting of the vote . They wanted to force Pence to ignore the votes by threatening to execute him. It may not have been a good plan, but it was a plan. The hard-right does not need the same level of strategic planning to hold on to power as the left needs to seize power. They don't need to seize airwaves or infrastructure because they were simply attempting to hold on to power. This is the key difference between a traditional coup and an autogolpe
I'm hispanic, but whatever. I'm not the one minimizing the very real and imminent threat of white-supremacist violence that is mainstreaming into American consciousness.
They are darlings of the left that is still interested in participating in electoral politics. You're on a message board of a podcast that went hard in the paint for Bernie...which, last time I checked, was participating in electoral politics.
So, uhh....having a hard time hearing your criticisms of revolutionary action and taking it seriously, especially when that criticism involves downplaying the threat of (dis)organized right-wing violence.
And my post history is not liberal apologia...in fact, the only time I ever come around these boards anymore is when I am concerned about the fascist apologia that is radiating from members who claim to be left who want to hand-wave away growing fascist violence.
It was a physically impossible plan that failed miserably at the first hurdle, and there's absolutely no valuable utility in portraying members of organs responsible for abetting and enforcing far-right nationalism and capitalist hegemony as heroically preventing a fascist coup.
Having a hard time taking you seriously as a person after reveling in calling me, a (half) black person, a 'white kid' and claiming you could 'smell my whiteness' after lodging issue with your absurd narrative and lionizing of the governmental organs responsible for untold oppression on people who look like me, then shrugging it off with 'I'm hispanic, whatever.'
Where's all your posts bringing attention to the underreported lynchings of black men in the wake of the George Floyd protests? Or the executions of demonstrators after Ferguson? Or do all the theatrics only come out to lament the 'threat' posed to the imperialist superpower and it's government?
We need downvotes back so I know whose side I'm supposed to take here
I'm just :sicko-hair: reading this thread
This is irrelevant. They still had a plan. It failed. Hence it was a failed autogolpe. History is littered with failed seizures of power, and they are often followed up with successful seizures of power if not properly addressed.
Even within your own language you use the term fascist coup. That should be a tell. You can be opposed to fascism and also be opposed to the policing
Look, I have no idea what you look like, and I don't really care. All I know is that you seem to be downplaying the threat of white-nationalist violence and equating it with meaningless temper tantrums for some reason. Fine. Whatever. You can downplay it if you want, but I'm not about to make that mistake.
Seriously, dude? Is your knock on me that I don't post enough? Is my posting volume not up to your standards? Have I not logged enough posts to be taken seriously? My very first response that set off this entire shit-show chain of events I acknowledge and oppose how policing is a form of enforcing the interests of capital and white supremacy. But I guess I'm sorry if I don't have chapo receipts from events that happened before this website was even online.
The president sabotaging response while the congressional police refuse to protect congress could easily have lead to actual murders or other attacks on congress.
At that point it's a massive state of emergency and trump is still the guy in charge.
It was a coup attempt. Coups fail all the fucking time.
I think you are attributing to white privilege when really it's just chapo style contrarianism.
For the sake of the people spectating, let me explain why I'm arguing this and why it's important.
There is a fundamental misunderstanding of what Fascism's role is and how it relates to the current situation.
Fascism is not an ideology that is independent of or diametrically composed to liberalism; rather it's a mechanism of capital to be leveraged by the bourgeoisie to supplement their hegemony and serve as a bulwark against leftism. It is not a genuinely popular movement, but masquerades as one. It adopts the trappings of one and often co-opts leftist rhetoric but it is incapable of, materially or ideologically, sustaining any sort of insurrection against the bourgeoisie state because it supports the bourgeoisie state and thus cannot nor does it have any interest in popular uprising.
Fascists can only take power by grafting themselves onto — and not usurping — existing institutions, often with the support of the bourgeoisie if not directly installed by them. We see this example in Hitler's Germany, who was funded by the billion by industrialists and permitted into government as Chancellor for fear of the KDP, Italy where Mussolini came into power by coalition government and instituted the typical bourgeoisie-friendly economic policies under the auspices of a liberal financial advisor, Japan, Chile and the Chicago boys, etc.
Premature Fascist attempts at violent seizures of power would miserably fail, only for them to get remarkably lenient treatment and be gradually reintroduced to combat leftism. The SDP, that unleashed the Freikorps on the Spartakists, would ban the German Communist Party's paramilitary wing and very soon after lift Hitler's ban on public speaking. Liberals will show disgust to Fascism, but always side with them against socialism because their common interest and purpose is the preservation of the propertied classes.
This is also why you see the Proud Boys and other similar groups cooperating with police officers in protests — again, despite the occasional rhetoric effort at portraying themselves as against government overreach — because they're an auxiliary of the bourgeois state and far from being able to supplant it, cannot exist without it. It is the bourgeois media that platforms it's adherents, again feigning disgust but we know perfectly well that they're more than capable of completely blocking out anything they actually don't want people to hear about like Modi's prosecution of Muslims and the newest pink wave in South America, and lavish money upon their figureheads.
The reactionaries were called to the capitol and enabled merely to serve their utility for intimidation and the stirring of fervor and passion in the Republican base. These reactionaries acted too prematurely, were promptly disavowed and dispersed without difficulty — and again, as usual, with practically a slap on the wrist because the bourgeois still has use for them.
The issue with the narrative of a credible Fascist coup getting fended off is that it implies that they exist as an independent and opposed force to the American state and liberalism, and they do not. It implies that the American bourgeois republic is something that is a 'better' alternative to Fascism, when the reality is that these reactionary nationalists are an vital instrument that helps to guarantee the survival of the capital and the bourgeois republic. If they posed any genuine threat to the current order, if Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi truly believed these people were actually an dangerous threat to their livelihoods and safeties, then there would have been a thorough investigation and purging of all responsible parties and organs. But there wasn't, because they're not — they're useful.
I am not understating the threat of Fascism or white nationalists. They are dangerous and I know this very well — My mother's birth certificate lists her race as 'negro' and I live not very far away from places where black men were lynched and transgender black women were killed last year in response to the George Floyd protests — but they cannot be effectively combated if we cannot recognize their actual nature and how they operate as a component in capital's myriad methods of hegemony.
No you're just completely ignoring what actually happened because you think it makes you a better leftist or something.
it doesn't. You have a shitty take on this.
What do you mean?
At the risk of being labelled a debate guy I'm gonna talk about a couple of things you said.
That explicitly wasn't the goal. Look at what Yeltsin did to Russia, parliament was opposed to him so he got rid of the parliament. These people weren't trying to form a new government they were trying to empower Trump.
There was though. There was deliberate actions taken by the capitol police, there was actions taken to delay response.
Considering their goal (as much as they had a goal) seems to be hostages and/or murder I think the sabotaged police response is extremely relevant and is probably the best argument for what makes this a legitimate attack vs a riot.
As much as we all shit on Amerikkka we should also acknowledge that collapse of America is likely to lead to immense amounts of suffering and death.
Acknowledging the attack for what it was cuts both ways. You can't insult people and call them libs and misrepresent their arguments while also refusing to actually do any real analysis of the situation. I don't think many (any?) are doing lib shit like claiming PTSD or demanding terrorism charges for everyone involved.
If they came through the right door and found someone like Omar, Tlaib, AOC, Bernie, etc... they probably kill them. Probably in horrific fashion with the entire country watching. I don't think it should be swept aside as lib shit, even though I think the democrats are and will handle it in awful fashion.
I hope you wouldn't be labeled a debate guy for elaborating on request, haha.
Yeltsin had control of the military, state media and etc. Some of the most fierce fighting (which would result in well over a hundred dead) occurred for control over a TV media complex which would play a crucial role in broadcasting pro-Yeltsin propaganda throughout the ordeal and Yeltsin's forces would end up besieging barricading, seizing bridges to ensure lockdown and etc.
Whether it's a autogolpe or coup d'etat, any meaningful attempt at seizing power actually requires an meaningful attempt at seizing power.
It was absolutely an legitimate attack. What I'm saying and explained in my post above is that the idea that this was an genuine, as in with any remotely coherent plan or chance at success, attempt to overthrow the state/American government by an force that is opposed to is a fundamental misunderstanding of American reactionaries and their role.
The continued existence of America leads to immense amounts of suffering and death, not only as a imperialist superpower responsible for upholding an hegemony that results in the preventable deaths of tens of millions every year but the inherent utter unsustainability of it's system both economically and geologically means that it's collapse and the consequences are also inevitable. There's no sense in subscribing to revolutionary communism if you reject the circumstances that would actually grant an opportunity for revolution.
Is this not 'real analysis?' https://hexbear.net/post/82941/comment/897804
All these people will approve budget bills that fund drone strikes on weddings, hospitals and orphanages. None of the resulting massacred peasant tenant farmers or guest workers will receive remotely the same attention precisely because they don't have cameras and the eyes of an entire country upon them.
We don't have the systems in place to deal with a revolutionary situation, which means we can't possibly win.
The problem is that Americas collapse could have almost unimaginable negative consequences for humanity, and those odds go way up when the only people with a platform or a base are insane reactionaries.
Or perhaps chapo style contrarianism is really just hipster socialist white privilege.
I urge you to read Catiline's post.
Well of course it is, but not everyone who adopts it has to be white.
fair enough. still a problem, though.
Getting really tired of the influx of stupidpol people on this forum.
We always need to be anti-racist and anti-fascist at the forefront. That doesn’t come with concessions or excuses
Maybe I am not a US citizen, so why the fuck would I care about an utopian situation in which the US is socialist when that isn't about to happen? Till then ACAB, till then I will warn against fascists and still jump with joy if the right persons die (of Coronavirus).