I need like, one fucking liberal to stand up and say "the Liberal politicians I've supported are anti-speech and equally responsible for creating the gestapo forces that Trump had readily available to him on *Day 1* of his administration".
One of them.
There are no arguments against the above statement that don't rely on rank partisanship and ideological extremism. ~*BOTH*~ parties are anti-speech and pro-police state.
The only difference is *who they target* and *how flagrant they are*.
John
in reply to John • • •BTW - neither party is even remotely interested in listening to voters on this issue. Democrats *threw away the most important election in US history* because they were so deeply uninterested in listening to speech they disagreed with.
I know it doesn't feel like it right now, but we're lucky that Trump won: neoliberal fascism under Harris or her successor would have been a lot smoother, a lot slower, a lot more durable and a lot harder to burn to ash.
Violet Madder
in reply to John • • •You know better-- they weren't merely "disinterested", they're actively hostile and deliberately sabotaging their own base.
There's no luck involved. What you describe under Harris is absolutely and already the plan for the next Democratic administration, which the current administration is designed to soften us up for.
John
in reply to Violet Madder • • •@violetmadder
It was a rhetorical flourish to show how nonsensical it was.
John
in reply to John • • •