I'm frequently puzzled by the distaste for articles of this sort of piece. To me it read as a calm dissection of a monster who had sacrificed any remaining moraity he had to the cult of Trump. I found it to be an effective condemnation of Hegseth. What am I missing?
A lot of the hardcore social justice stuff is Old Testament. The NT tends to be apolitical. The OT reads like an argument between social justice types and religious obedience types. (It's an ongoing argument.)
The best form of resistance that comes to mind is for local governments to start some very inconvenient roadwork near the camps.
Obviously, this won't work everywhere.
This looks like a solid form of general protest. However, the immediate effect will be to free up resources for detainee flights.
The best thing would be for local governments to bulldoze the roads accessing the camps
CBP, which shot Pretti, has long been worse than ICE. We need an agency with its function, but the current CBP is probably unsalvageable.
This. And they'll *particularly* stay high if investors see the Fed making obviously inflationary moves, like lowering short term rates inappropriately to goose the economy.
Helen of Troy was supposed to be the most beautiful woman in the world. Lupita Nyong'o is the most beautiful woman in the world, so she's the actress who ought to have the role. Isn't that how they want things to work? (As if.)
The small l libertarian Cato Institute is turning out to be a reliably good source for information on immigration abuses. Radely Balko also comes out of that worldview, I think.
There are a few of them.
A book cover with the text, BLUEPRINT FOR REVOLUTION SRDJA POPOVIC HOW TO USE RICE PUDDING, LEGO MEN, and OTHER NONVIOLENT TECHNIQUES to GALVANIZE COMMUNITIES, OVERTHROW DICTATORS, or SIMPLY CHANGE the WORLD
I'm just here to second the recommendation for this book. "Blueprint for Revolution" by Drdja Popovic is a good source for the how tos of nonviolent civil resistance. It emphasizes the same point.
My understanding is that, under House rules, a "proposition to impeach" must be heard at once because it is a "matter of high privilege."
It often seems as though we're rougher on people who own up to their mistakes than to those who are hardened in their errors. This is another kind of error.
There's a reason the regressive right feels it has to resort to censorship: many people leave it when exposed to the broader world.
This looks like AI "enhancement" to me. There are several apps/plug-ins that will interpolate data into fuzzy images, and it seems like every photo editor will offer tidy up images by simplifying the background. Products intended for making pretty vacation photos end up creating lies.
Okay, some people can't handle it and will quietly give up. Fine. But anyone loudly and publicly giving up is, intentionally or not, serving as a propagandist for the regime.
I'm sure groups everywhere are contacting their regular marshals and, typically, alerting local police, about either vigils tonight or protests tomorrow. I'm sure there are people out getting signs printed as we speak.
That's organization of a kind, but it's not particularly sophisticated.
Who was it who said something like, "If I am ever forced to choose between betraying my friends or my country, I hope to have the courage to betray my country"?
I'm feeling that right now, because Canada has always been a good friend to the US.
Every scholar of civil resistance emphasizes that focus on sheer numbers is a mistake. See George Lakey, "How We Win," Erica Chenowith, Srdja Popovic "Blueprint for Revolution," Chenowith & Stephan, "Why Civil Resistance Works," among many others.
Mass demonstrations are a tactic, not a strategy.
Protests are excellent if they're a gateway to other activism (as your article says). They're a trap if the focus is entirely on numbers. No Kings focuses too much on numbers and is at risk of looking like a failure if each protest isn't larger than the previous one.
Voter suppression can be overcome with appropriate organization. If a strong anti-suppression effort fails, it still can make the cheating obvious. Showing the cheating is usually a critical step towards involving large numbers of people in other forms of activism.
Mass protests aren't really what the "3.5% rule" is about. Committed involvement, like involvement in neighborhood ICE response, is. Erica Chenowith, the source of the "rule" talks about this in many interviews and articles.
Mass protests are fine but not the right focus.
People who say this often believe nations have immutable national characters. The only way they know to say "This is not who we must always be" is to say "This is not who we are."
This IS who we are. It's NOT who we must always be. Change isn't easy, but we need to try.
One of the worst gaps in American law is the lack of any good way to sue federal agents. There are "Bivens actions," but SCOTUS has nerfed them. This is something Congress would have to correct.
"We're going to lose" = "I'm going to do nothing, and I'm going to encourage everyone else to do nothing."
There's a reason that the great anthem of the Civil Rights Movement is "We Shall Overcome," not "We're Almost Certainly Going to Lose."
"We're going to win" is a statement of resolve... maybe faith. It's not merely "boosterism." That's because without firm resolve or faith we will not have the will to face the obstacles ahead, and we will lose even though we might have won.
Their ability to inflict irreparable losses, the fact that they have inflicted irreparable losses, is why we can't give up. I come to this from what started primarily as an environmentalist perspective. I know every day does damage from which we cannot entirely recover.
I know we must not lose.
Also, just FYI, Biden couldn't do it federally because US Constitutional amendments are almost impossible to pass. Democrats couldn't pass a federal law (as opposed to an amendment) because the Senate Democrats decided to retain the filibuster rule.
He's at 52% approval on border security, with 90% of Republicans approving and 36% of independents. That's about his best issue, but it's not quite "love."
apnorc.org/projects/tru...
Correct. But knowing how to sidestep the hurdles is one way to limit their effect. Publicizing the existence of hand cancellations, even in low impact places like this comment, helps reduce voter suppression.
If you tell people about the new rule, tell them how to get a same day cancellation.
She clearly doesn't understand Trump.
Just FYI, the new regulations still allow local post offices to hand postmark envelopes. Those postmarks will have the correct date.
If a leader can help their people by abasing themself, they might have an obligation to do it. Thing is, Trump loves to get people to abase themselves but give nothing. They might as well keep their dignity.
