Most active commenters
  • anigbrowl(6)
  • SpicyLemonZest(6)
  • wat10000(5)
  • whoooboyy(4)
  • BeFlatXIII(4)

←back to thread

574 points nh43215rgb | 80 comments | | HN request time: 1.683s | source | bottom
1. ktallett ◴[] No.45780988[source]
Why exactly have ICE been given limitless power? Facial recognition is at best right more than half the time, but many studies have shown it to be consistently faulty leading to many wrong ID's. What is the point of a database with incorrect biometric data connected to a person?
replies(11): >>45781281 #>>45781284 #>>45781294 #>>45781410 #>>45781531 #>>45781652 #>>45782048 #>>45782059 #>>45782431 #>>45782440 #>>45784642 #
2. fishmicrowaver ◴[] No.45781281[source]
Guarantee Palantir is 'mitigating' those concerns before anyone has them by having a 'process' and 'guardrails' in place, so everyone can convince themselves this is a great thing to do. The decision makers won't even be around by the time a substantial enough number of people are harmed to incur blowback, and by then, people will have gotten rich/promoted.
replies(1): >>45781516 #
3. AtlasBarfed ◴[] No.45781284[source]
Because half of American voters want fascism.
replies(4): >>45781594 #>>45781728 #>>45781899 #>>45782453 #
4. AlotOfReading ◴[] No.45781294[source]

    What is the point of a database with incorrect biometric data connected to a person?

Accuracy is irrelevant. Even if facial recognition as a technology was adequate, it certainly wouldn't be in whatever random lighting conditions are present in the real world after going through the image processing pipelines of inconsistent phone hardware.

The point is domination, and the app is simply one means to that end. They'd find another if they had to.

5. TrackerFF ◴[] No.45781410[source]
Because who's going to stop them?

What happens right now is this: ICE can run loose and do whatever they want. If some judge finds their activities illegal, they can block ICE from doing the illegal things.

But...who's going to stop them? Not the DOJ. Stephen Miller has said that ICE have "federal immunity". The keen observer will of course know that there's no such thing as "federal immunity", so a charitable way to interpret that statement is that no-one federal will go after them.

So what about states, and local police? Sure, they could start arresting them, but then again, Miller et. al have warned the states about not interfering, threatening with going after LEO's etc. with federal charges if they do so.

The long story made short is that they can (and will) keep doing illegal shit until someone stops them, and that's not going to happen as long as Trump is POTUS. DOJ and ICE leaderships has explicitly said that their workers should just ignore the law and courts.

replies(6): >>45781551 #>>45782521 #>>45783191 #>>45783353 #>>45783361 #>>45783889 #
6. XorNot ◴[] No.45781516[source]
You Americans are really going to have to get over trying to blame corporations for all your problems, or expecting them to fix all your problems.

This is a problem from your government, by your government, that you voted for - one way or another. Pretending this problem is originating from anywhere else except the political choices you're making as a nation is denying reality.

replies(8): >>45781595 #>>45781698 #>>45782065 #>>45782149 #>>45782334 #>>45782500 #>>45782699 #>>45784780 #
7. maxerickson ◴[] No.45781531[source]
Removal of administrative restraint is different than limitless power.

I think it remains to be seen how broader US society responds to the approach being taken. Hard to say how close the Senate will be next year.

replies(1): >>45786832 #
8. empath75 ◴[] No.45781551[source]
Yeah I don’t think people understand how bad it is. ICE are a lawless secret police force with loyalty only to trump and they are actively and intentionally recruiting racists and fascist and fast tracking them through regardless of background. Right wing gangs like the Proud Boys are actively funneling their members into it.

Their budget right now is larger than the Marine Corps and a lot of their members are looking at unemployment or prison time if the democrats get back into control of the government. Think about what they are likely to do during the mid terms if they are told to monitor election sites. They are a gang of dangerously brutal violent thugs operating with complete impunity.

replies(2): >>45781678 #>>45782433 #
9. righthand ◴[] No.45781594[source]
Not even close to half.
replies(2): >>45781911 #>>45782150 #
10. djcannabiz ◴[] No.45781595{3}[source]
I agree with you, but I think this ignores the structural factors caused by corporations that lead to the election of this government in the first place (multinational corporations lobbying for NAFTA and the resulting deindustrialization of america).
11. mindslight ◴[] No.45781652[source]
> Why exactly have ICE been given limitless power?

To act as the domestic enforcement arm for Trump's autocratic fascism red in tooth and claw, the culmination of what everyone not drinking social media Kool-aid has been saying for the last 10 years. Yet a third of our country chose to aggressively reject these concerns because throwing the Constitution in the trash "owned the libs", which was the only concrete policy they had left after decades of being led around by the nose by the corporate state.

12. nozzlegear ◴[] No.45781678{3}[source]
To your point, this article¹ recently analyzed records from the Federal Procurement Data System and found that ICE has boosted their weapons spending by 700%:

> Most of the spending was on guns and armor, but there have also been significant purchases of chemical weapons and “guided missile warheads and explosive components.”

I'd really like to know why ICE needs guided missile warheads to do their job. (Edit: pointed out below, this is a purchase category that includes distraction devices like smoke grenades – they're thankfully not buying actual warheads.)

At this point, I'm confident that ICE could kick down my door and blow my white, midwestern, US Citizen ass away where I sit on this couch, and none of them would ever see the inside of a courtroom.

¹ https://popular.info/p/ice-boosts-weapons-spending-700

replies(2): >>45781783 #>>45784772 #
13. analog31 ◴[] No.45781698{3}[source]
>>> your government, that you voted for - one way or another

No, I didn't, not one way, nor another. I might have had a share of influence over policy in certain statewide elections, but not in most other elections.

14. ndsipa_pomu ◴[] No.45781728[source]
Are there really that many unbelievably stupid people?
replies(4): >>45781863 #>>45781910 #>>45783260 #>>45784846 #
15. edot ◴[] No.45781783{4}[source]
I doubt this makes you feel better but they didn't buy guided missile warheads. That category ("guided missile warheads and explosive components") contains, among other things, "distraction devices". So things like flashbangs, smoke grenades, etc.

The purchase order PDF is linked here: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ice-guided-missile-warhead...

replies(1): >>45782339 #
16. spencerflem ◴[] No.45781863{3}[source]
Some of them are unbelievably cruel
replies(1): >>45782513 #
17. mothballed ◴[] No.45781899[source]
Democrats threw the election by telling their primary voters party base to go fuck themselves and instead just jammed through an unpopular candidate (even in her home state) at the 11th hour.
replies(2): >>45781997 #>>45783233 #
18. animitronix ◴[] No.45781910{3}[source]
Yup!
19. animitronix ◴[] No.45781911{3}[source]
Yeah well maybe the rest should get off their ass and vote then chief
replies(2): >>45782058 #>>45782312 #
20. wat10000 ◴[] No.45781997{3}[source]
I really enjoy the American political dynamic where Democrats are the only ones considered to have any agency. If Democrats do it, it’s Democrats’ fault. If Republicans do it, it’s Democrats’ fault for provoking them or not doing enough to stop them. Nothing is ever the responsibility of the people who cast their votes for Trump.
replies(5): >>45782128 #>>45782131 #>>45782141 #>>45783041 #>>45787746 #
21. wat10000 ◴[] No.45782048[source]
Every authoritarian needs secret police. ICE happens to be the perfect agency for Trump to use for this, because immigration is such a hot issue for his base, and immigration law provides some nice loopholes in constitutional guarantees.

For example, deportation is a civil action, not criminal. That means that to exile you from your home the government does not need to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, does not need to provide you with legal representation if you can’t afford a lawyer, and the procedure takes place in an administrative court. There have been numerous cases of small children representing themselves in deportation proceedings. And this was all before the current administration.

The point of a bogus database is to give them cover for arresting, imprisoning, and deporting anyone they wish to.

22. wat10000 ◴[] No.45782058{4}[source]
A third are for it. A third are against it. A third just don’t care.
23. quickthrowman ◴[] No.45782059[source]
> Why exactly have ICE been given limitless power?

> What is the point of a database with incorrect biometric data connected to a person?

The answer to both questions is ‘to cause fear among the [immigrant] population.’

24. whoooboyy ◴[] No.45782065{3}[source]
I think you are right, but not thinking deeply enough. You point at the government, and the voting that led to it. 100% that's a step in the root cause chain.

But we cannot stop there, and needs ask why. There are structural forces that lead to this government, some of which are corporate. Fox and MSNBC exist to extract wealth from polarization, and have every incentive to drive wedges between us. Meta and X likewise get paid for optimizing engagement and hate drives engagement.

It's not all corporations, but they contribute to structural forces we're have to unwind as we also try to fix the government side too.

25. mothballed ◴[] No.45782128{4}[source]
The Democratic party selects the Democrat candidate in a two-party system.

It can be argued as shared fault.

By, without vote/primary, unilaterally selecting a candidate to go on the ballot an unelected bureaucracy jammed up the election. Unfortunately in USA, it doesn't work how you propose, whether you appear on ballot is only up to democratic choice if there are primaries, if not an unelected bureaucracy selects the people that actually go on the ballot and due to dynamics of our voting system virtually ensure those will be the options.

In most states you basically have Democrat, Republican, maybe Libertarian party nominated candidate on the ballot and that is it. Writing in is throwing your vote.

I would argue we probably could fix this with write-in only and some sort of ranked voting kind of system or similar, but as it stands a large part of the election process is vulnerable to anti-democratic processes and this played out in Trump's favor last election.

replies(1): >>45782536 #
26. whoooboyy ◴[] No.45782131{4}[source]
FWIW, as a left of democrat voter, the Dems have been a corporate captured neoliberal party for 40 years. They spent a lot of time building the infrastructure for a Trump-like. Biden and Harris were uniquely poor opponents to run.

That doesn't absolve the republicans for turning to fascism, but we shouldn't say the Dems are blameless here.

replies(1): >>45782565 #
27. Spivak ◴[] No.45782141{4}[source]
I think it's because people, somewhat rightfully, consider the descent into a fascist regime to be a force of nature—a bug in humanity v1.0 that history has proven we have basically no internal defenses for. And the last election might have been the point of no return so it's frustrating to see the party opposed to the regime own goal so hard in the one election it actually mattered.
28. jordanscales ◴[] No.45782149{3}[source]
I did not vote for this. Some of my neighbors voted for this because they were pushed over the edge by inflammatory social media algorithms, some stayed home for similar reasons.

Corporations absolutely have an effect on all of this, you can bet they'd save time and money by focusing their efforts elsewhere if they thought it was pointless.

29. whoooboyy ◴[] No.45782150{3}[source]
Note the parent said "voters" not people. Of the people who voted, yes, nearly half voted for this. You are correct it's a small minority of the populace, but not of voters.
30. righthand ◴[] No.45782312{4}[source]
Yes that’s a valid emotional criticism, I’m more worried about normalizing authoritarianism and fascism by saying “half support it”. We’re already sliding down because we’re lazy privileged Americans. IMO, stating that half agree signals an okayed complacency.

There are emotions (half support) and then reality (less than 30% of Americans). The emotions got us into this mess about misdemeanors at the federal level.

The authoritarians want you to say: “50% of people love this, give up already.”

When the truth is that 28% of people voted for Trump in 2024. He has lost a percentage of that support through his actions since January. Don’t help them normalize this through emotion.

Say it’s “half” is negotiating with fascists.

31. spwa4 ◴[] No.45782334{3}[source]
Americans? This is being rolled out all over the west, and was already pervasive everywhere else. China uses "subtle" cameras but there's just so many that you can't help but constantly see them around any city center, although I think I actually prefer them hiding the cameras (certainly better than London atm)

Note that all the facial recognition is being done by governments, which is the entity everyone suggests using to protect against facial recognition.

https://etias.com/articles/eu-biometric-border-checks-begin-...

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gp7j55zxvo (under the control of the executive)

https://www.politico.eu/article/how-facial-recognition-is-ta... (under the control of the executive)

https://www.biometricupdate.com/202405/police-in-germany-usi...

https://www.reuters.com/technology/italy-outlaws-facial-reco...

The important part about the Italian "ban" is, as with most privacy laws in the EU, the government bans facial recognition for companies, and explicitly allows the government to use it for everything they do)

This is common in the EU. For example, the GPDR guarantees that your medical data isn't used by companies. That sounds great! Except for the exceptions: insurance and health care providers are exempted, courts (even foreign ones) are excempted (and so a judge can subpoena your private medical information for divorce or custody cases), the police is exempted, youth services is exempted, ...

32. nozzlegear ◴[] No.45782339{5}[source]
Thank you! I'm still concerned about the massively increased weapons spending (it partly makes sense since they've been hiring so much, every agent has a gun), but it's good to know they're not buying actual warheads lol. I appreciate the link and the correction.
33. fzeroracer ◴[] No.45782431[source]
ICE is, essentially the perfect cover agency. Your average Fox News-addled American will see criticisms of ICE and immediately jump to its defense, because obviously that means you want immigrants to take over our country or you hate our borders or you hate the law etc. You can even look back through various HN threads on some of the various crimes ICE has committed in the past year and see this common byline.

The fact that Americans are getting caught in the dragnet, having their possessions and lives destroyed, getting sent to secret jails or being assaulted for merely being in the same zipcode as an ICE agent doesn't matter to them. It's all about inflicting harm on people they dislike, and if ICE is harming someone then obviously it's because it's they did something bad.

It's pretty dire circumstances. ICE was always close to a paramilitary organization, it just took Trump to actually fund it and push it over the edge.

replies(1): >>45783067 #
34. kevin_thibedeau ◴[] No.45782433{3}[source]
> a lot of their members are looking at unemployment or prison time

They're all going to receive a blanket pardon.

replies(4): >>45783207 #>>45784947 #>>45786168 #>>45786283 #
35. beej71 ◴[] No.45782440[source]
Legal Eagle just did a video about this. When you get Constitutionally screwed over by federal agents, you basically have zero legal recourse (unlike with state and local police).
36. danaris ◴[] No.45782453[source]
This is unhelpfully reductive.

First of all, it's misleading in its categorization: "half of people who voted in the last election" is not the same as "half of all eligible voters".

Second of all, a lot of the people who voted for Trump do not meaningfully "want fascism". Some do—no question about that! And, unfortunately, some who didn't before have rationalized themselves into wanting it now in order to self-justify their decision to vote for him.

But many of them are low-information voters who genuinely do not understand what is going on, and fall into one (or more) of a few categories:

- People who have always voted Republican, because their parents always voted Republican, and that's just The Way Things Are.

- People who have been brainwashed by constant propaganda from Fox News over the past 30 years telling them that Democrats are Evil.

- People who have poor to no civics education, have seen their economic situation slide slowly downward over the last few decades (or fall off a cliff, eg in 2008), and have heard the various Republican candidates telling them, over and over, "Just vote for us! We will solve all your problems. You don't have to worry about how!" (or "...by punishing the evil Others who are the cause of every ill in this country", depending on how racist they're already primed to be)

None of that requires "wanting fascism". And I can tell you, from personal experience, that there are still people out there—left, right, and center—who genuinely do not know what is going on. They don't watch the news. They just try to get by. They have no idea that ICE is abducting citizens off the streets, that Trump has shattered the executive branch institutions that actually run this country, or that the Supreme Court has said that Trump can do whatever the hell he likes.

If you want to be able to fix a problem, you have to understand it in all its nuance, and just dismissing tens of millions of people as "eh, they all wanted fascism; guess there's no possible way to reach them, then" is the wrong problem definition.

replies(1): >>45783583 #
37. caconym_ ◴[] No.45782500{3}[source]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
38. JKCalhoun ◴[] No.45782513{4}[source]
Probably the most horrible thing I heard this year: “I’m ready to watch people burn now.”
39. shkkmo ◴[] No.45782521[source]
> Stephen Miller has said that ICE have "federal immunity". The keen observer will of course know that there's no such thing as "federal immunity"

The immunity is only from state prosecution and only for acts taken required as part of their official duties, but it does exist.

40. wat10000 ◴[] No.45782536{5}[source]
This boils down to: Democrats didn’t provide a good enough alternative.

Which I will completely accept as true. They didn’t.

From here, there are two branching paths. Did the Democrats put up someone who was actually worse than Trump? As in, are we better off than if the November election had gone the other way? Or did the Democrats have a better candidate who just wasn’t better enough to win? (Fully understanding that this is a very subjective question.)

It’s my firm opinion that it’s the second one. Harris would have been a better President. (So would Jeb! Bush, Mitt Romney, the festering corpse of Richard Nixon, or a frog snatched out of the Tidal Basin.) In which case, giving Democrats any blame for the outcome requires the people who voted for the actual winner to have no agency. They were presented with a choice and they selected the worse one. That’s entirely on them.

41. wat10000 ◴[] No.45782565{5}[source]
How about this: Democrats share some responsibility for the climate that allowed someone like Trump to gain traction. People who ticked the “Trump” box have full responsibility for the fact that he currently occupies the office.
replies(1): >>45784838 #
42. impossiblefork ◴[] No.45782699{3}[source]
The thing though, is that the US government and the successful companies are strong connected.

Networks of companies support political candidates, so there really isn't a true separation between the government's actions and the will of these corporations.

43. fastball ◴[] No.45783041{4}[source]
The American people have agency and are responsible for the candidates they elect.

But part of this process is candidates being nominated by the major parties, and the RNC put forward a candidate that people actually wanted to elect. The DNC did a worse job of this, as a seeming plurality of votes for Harris were not because they liked her, but because she was "not Trump".

Both parties have agency, but the DNC did a worse job at picking their nominee (assuming the goal was to win an election).

replies(1): >>45784764 #
44. tdeck ◴[] No.45783067[source]
This is not untrue, but it's also worth pointing out that democrats have been active participants in making ICE the dangerous, unaccountable, overreaching agency that it is. Nothing was meaningfully rolled back under Biden. And in Congress they didn't even block the massive funding increase for ICE earlier this year (instead Chuck Schumer urged his caucus to vote to end debate).

This is in fact one of the most distressing parts of the situation. Most people conceive of getting off the couch to vote in the midterm as the absolute height of their potential power to stop this. Phone banking for some blue dog in the midterm isng going to cut it in this situation.

Meanwhile the "opposition" has decided to lay low rather than risk their (checks notes) low 30% approval rating by taking a stand on anything (except funding genocide) for most of this year. Every institution is being steamrolled, gutted, corrupted, and weaponized faster than we can keep track, and folks are trying to make themselves believe if we just vote hard enough this will all end in 2-4 years like it was a bad dream rather than an ongoing play-by-play descent into fascism.

replies(1): >>45784951 #
45. BeFlatXIII ◴[] No.45783191[source]
> Sure, they could start arresting them, but then again, Miller et. al have warned the states about not interfering, threatening with going after LEO's etc. with federal charges if they do so.

States ought to do that aynway, then instigate cop-on-cop violence. Ask Putin or Xi for help.

46. BeFlatXIII ◴[] No.45783207{4}[source]
…and a Dem president would be too cowardly to add "new" charges and break the system.
47. BeFlatXIII ◴[] No.45783233{3}[source]
You're not wrong about the process. However, I'm deeply skeptical of the idea that a popular primary candidate translates to a general election win or that the continual 2nd place primary finisher somehow can't be far more viable in the general election than the primary winner.
48. BeFlatXIII ◴[] No.45783260{3}[source]
This is what abolishing knowledge tests for voting caused. It was an unintended consequence of a necessary reform.
replies(1): >>45783308 #
49. ndsipa_pomu ◴[] No.45783308{4}[source]
As I recall, those knowledge tests were specifically designed to prevent black people voting. Unfortunately, the USA seems to be regressing to a system whereby only rich white men would be able to vote (and only if they're going to vote for the fascists).
50. kbrisso ◴[] No.45783353[source]
The scary thing? Who says Trump is going away?
51. SubiculumCode ◴[] No.45783361[source]
It depends on how hard they push States. If it comes to the point where States begin threatening succession, and starts giving orders to local law enforcement...
replies(2): >>45784203 #>>45784697 #
52. dfedbeef ◴[] No.45783583{3}[source]
Not to be an asshole, this will not get fixed. It doesn't matter how reductive people are, helpfully or otherwise. The fascist cat is out of the bag.
replies(1): >>45783881 #
53. danaris ◴[] No.45783881{4}[source]
Oh, well, then I guess we should all just give up and deepthroat the boot, right?

Don't be absurd. Fascism rose in Germany, and was defeated. Fascism rose in Spain, and Italy, and was defeated.

We can defeat fascism too. We will defeat fascism too.

It'll just be harder if more people think like you.

replies(3): >>45784269 #>>45784906 #>>45784935 #
54. rgbrenner ◴[] No.45783889[source]
The keen observer will of course know that there's no such thing as "federal immunity"

The scary thing is that there is.. you should look up "sovereign immunity". The government has complete immunity, except where and how the law permits it to be held accountable. And while we have a constitution, defending those rights through the courts requires legislation to permit it. For the most part, federal law permits lawsuits against states that violate the constitution, but have permitted far less accountability for federal actions that violate the constitution.

For example, Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act only permits individuals to sue state and local governments for rights violations. It can't be used to sue the federal government.

There's many court cases, dating back decades, tossing out cases against the federal government for rights violations. Look how SCOTUS has limited the precedent set by Bivens over the years, basically neutering it entirely.

55. Kinrany ◴[] No.45784203{3}[source]
Secession?
56. ergl ◴[] No.45784269{5}[source]
> Fascism rose in Spain, and Italy, and was defeated.

Someone forgot about the 40-year long fascist dictatorship Spain was under

57. anigbrowl ◴[] No.45784642[source]
Why exactly have ICE been given limitless power?

To keep everyone else in line. Americans are so programmed to defer to aw enforcement that they will watch the most blatant abuses carried out right in front of them with little other than hand-wringing. Immigration status is just the excuse, compliance is the goal. What do you think is going to happen at the next election? ICE doesn't even need to intimidate people at polling places, just the rumor that hey are doing so will be enough to scare many citizens away from voting in person. They could vote by mail, but no doubt you're aware that the President ad his party constantly impugn the validity of such votes. How much do you trust them to uphold and abide by the voting process? We've already seen what happens when they get a result that's not favorable to them.

replies(1): >>45785433 #
58. chasd00 ◴[] No.45784697{3}[source]
I live in Texas and lots of people were talking about that a few years ago. "We should just secede!", when i pointed out that they would have to defeat the United States Marines (and all of the United States armed forces) first they got real quiet. Once a state declares they're no longer a part of the United States then any sense of Constitutional protections or governance fly out the window. They're now on their own and subject to the full force of the remaining United States.
59. anigbrowl ◴[] No.45784764{5}[source]
This is a sideshow. Harris was a poor candidate, and lost a ton of votes because she refused to commit to a ceasefire in Gaza. Th larger problem is the Dems lining up behind the idea of running Biden again even though he was obviously inadequate.

Dem flaws aside, Trump isn't just 'a candidate people actually wanted to elect'. He's an authoritarian, every major prediction about how authoritarian this administration would be has turned out to be correct, he instigated efforts to overturn the result of the last election where he lost, and 25-30% of the voting population likes authoritarianism and do not give a shit about what the Constitution actually says.

replies(1): >>45788038 #
60. chasd00 ◴[] No.45784772{4}[source]
i'm not into this level of conspiracy really but all it takes is a lawyer checking a box and then giving a thumbs up and you could be killed with a Hellfire launched from a MQ9 at any time. This has already happened during the Obama admin and MQ9s patrol the border so is pretty much inevitable if not already happening there.
61. baq ◴[] No.45784780{3}[source]
see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy
62. whoooboyy ◴[] No.45784838{6}[source]
That's not incompatible with what I said, and indeed is largely what I attempted to convey.
63. anigbrowl ◴[] No.45784846{3}[source]
Humans display a reduced set of consistent behavioral phenotypes in dyadic games https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.1600451

Evidence suggests that about 30% of people will accept being worse off in order to inflict a greater loss on someone else. They form a plurality, with the other groups being win-win types (~20%), loss-averse pessimists (~20%), selfless volunteers (~15%), and inconsistent folks who may be confused (~15%).

Now this is just empirical observation rather than proof, but it's a good quality observation, enough that it has heuristic value. If you admit the possibility that about 1/3 of people are mean, then an awful lot of ongoing political phenomena become much easier to understand.

replies(1): >>45788844 #
64. tastyface ◴[] No.45784906{5}[source]
Obviously, fascism will be defeated someday. The cost is the issue. Defeating fascism in Germany required the biggest and most violent war in all of human history, plus a decimation of its population.
65. anigbrowl ◴[] No.45784935{5}[source]
In Germany and Italy it was defeated by the military loss of a total war. In Span it was defeated by the eventual death of Franco and the assassination of his designated successor, after decades of right wing rule.

You are in such a rush to be sarcastic that you're accusing the GP of wanting to cooperate with fascism, when they're simply stating the reality of the problem. You're saying naying nice words about the outcome you want to see, but ignoring the horrors between the institution of fascism and its eventual defeat. That suggests to me that you don't really have any idea or plan about how to overcome it, you're just wishcasting. The danger of this is that many people will advocate waiting for the next election to decide if it's really fascism (because that's an unpleasant thing people would prefer to avoid), but don't have anything in reserve if the election is subverted, and in any case are giving away the political initiative for a year.

Instead of trying to rally people with WW2 tropes (which the non-fascists are in no position to wage) it'd be better to build momentum toward general strikes, which have a rather successful track record in the US and have been quasi-outlawed as a result (eg by the Taft-Hartley act, which bans solidarity and political strikes by labor unions).

replies(1): >>45785236 #
66. SpicyLemonZest ◴[] No.45784947{4}[source]
A blanket pardon can protect you from prison time, it can't guarantee you a job. We can do quite a lot to ensure that people who worked for ICE from 2025-2028 die miserable, penniless, and alone.
67. SpicyLemonZest ◴[] No.45784951{3}[source]
The opposition is right this second taking a stand on funding the entire government! I don't understand how this narrative keeps spreading when it's so transparently untrue.
replies(1): >>45786919 #
68. SpicyLemonZest ◴[] No.45785236{6}[source]
I just don't see how you're going to run a general strike against Trump with the Teamsters and much of their membership on Trump's side.

My plan to overcome it is to make it clear to elite decisionmakers that they will be held personally responsible for the misery Trump's administration inflicts on people, including by many of the people who thought they supported Trump before they realized what he was doing. It's not a perfect plan, nor does it have a guarantee of success, but it seems better than the alternatives.

replies(1): >>45786939 #
69. SpicyLemonZest ◴[] No.45785433[source]
We've seen what happens when they get a result that's not favorable to them, and it resulted in them leaving office anyway while hundreds of their supporters went to prison for years. Trump did break them out, and I'm sure that's given some of them nasty ideas, but I'd encourage them to reflect on what the maximum penalty for treason is if they try again.
70. solid_fuel ◴[] No.45786168{4}[source]
> They're all going to receive a blanket pardon.

Well, we've already crossed into "the law is what I say it is" territory thanks to the republicans, so the next admin just needs to leverage that. The GOP thinks that pardons signed by autopen are invalid [0] so I don't see what would stop the democrats from apply the same logic to ICE agents and administration, except perhaps cowardice.

[0] https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5575379-house-gop-comer-d...

71. dragonwriter ◴[] No.45786283{4}[source]
> They're all going to receive a blanket pardon.

To the extent that their actions are unlawful, they are often crimes under state law in the states they occur, as well as federal law. The President of the United States has no power to pardon state law offenses (and while there may be political considerations that discourage pursuing charges while it might provoke conflict with the Trump Administration, but in many cases the statutes of limitations for violent crimes under state law are not short.

72. burnt-resistor ◴[] No.45786832[source]
"Plenary authority" of the "unitary executive" is manifested as acceleration of power by continuous, overwhelming lawlessness to normalize deviancy with a feckless Congress and supportive supreme judiciary.
73. tdeck ◴[] No.45786919{4}[source]
Is this moment tbe only time you've been paying attention all year? The Senate opposition leader's actions now literally directly contradict his actions from several months ago. If they had taken this stand then, a lot less damage would have been done.
replies(1): >>45790302 #
74. anigbrowl ◴[] No.45786939{7}[source]
A general strike is general, not just trade unions. Not everyone will join in, nor will it be national in scale, at least at first. But it can disruptive enough as it spreads to slow down the economy, be the top headline every day, and push the administration into increasing untenable positions. A general strike isn't a formal legal state of affairs, but a combination of ongoing protest and economic stoppage that succeeds by the fact of mass participation, without any violent focus.

make it clear to elite decisionmakers that they will be held personally responsible for the misery Trump's administration inflicts on people

How?

replies(1): >>45790477 #
75. array_key_first ◴[] No.45787746{4}[source]
It's because everybody, republican voters included, understands that republicans are extraordinarily stupid and their policy does not work.

If you look at Trump, the only people who think he's honest are his opponents. His own supporters swear up and down he's a liar, he doesn't know what he's talking about, he won't do this or that. And this is their defensive! These are the best arguments they can articulate in his favor!

I think, the thing is, a lot of people don't want effective leaders or care. They want to win, or maybe they want to screw over some people they don't like. So go ahead and elect the idiots with bad policy, because government sucks anyway or something.

76. fastball ◴[] No.45788038{6}[source]
You can call it a sideshow, but it kinda seems like the DNC want the authoritarian to win as long as they keep scoring own goals.
replies(1): >>45788264 #
77. anigbrowl ◴[] No.45788264{7}[source]
What I mean is teh arguments over nomination process are a sideshow. I did not want Biden to run again, but the president getting waved through to run for a second term is a totally normal thing, and normalcy bias is a major Democratic flaw. I don't care so much about Harris picking up the candidacy without a primary when Biden dropped out, it wasn't ideal but a rushed primary would have been a different sort of shitshow.
78. spencerflem ◴[] No.45788844{4}[source]
Yeah, I think this is super important.

I didn’t come to this easily, as someone who generally believes in the goodness of others. But it’s really the only explanation at this point

79. SpicyLemonZest ◴[] No.45790302{5}[source]
I’ve been paying attention throughout and I don’t see any contradiction at all. In March, Schumer explained and I agreed that a shutdown would have provided political cover for Elon Musk to keep blowing up entire departments under DOGE. Now Musk is gone, DOGE is severely weakened, and the caucus has had more time to workshop their goals.

One important dynamic I think people often miss is that party discipline is weak in the US. Schumer can’t make the caucus go along with a shutdown fight; he has to convince them it’s a good idea, and be confident they’ll stay convinced for long enough to get what he wants, because otherwise the 7 most moderate members will happily defect and start writing their campaign ads about how they’re independent minded who won’t be pushed around by anyone. He’s already got 3 defectors in the current fight.

80. SpicyLemonZest ◴[] No.45790477{8}[source]
Perhaps we're talking about different things? When I imagine a "general strike", I envision something like the general strike in Italy last month, where major trade unions got together to announce that October 3 is strike day and everyone in Italy should go on strike together. I'm not sure what a general strike without broad participation, national scale, or labor movement backing is.