[vorpalhex]

> Multiple states are currently making teaching about racism illegal

They are specifically outlawing teaching racial superiority or inferiority. You can read the Texas bill here: https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=87R&B...

While this is definitely an anti-CRT bill, it does not make "teaching about racism illegal" in any sense.

> half of the country is trying to perform a fascist coup

> Fascism

> often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

From https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism

> Coup

> 1 : coup d'état a military coup

From https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/coup

Oddly enough, "half of the country" would be approximately a majority. If they are "performing" something, it would basically just be Democracy, though I suspect you're equivocating between a small group of insurrectionists and 175,000,000 people.

> This is the most hilariously sheltered and out of touch comment I have ever read in half a decade of reading HN

Well, you were at least self prescient if mistimed.

[unfocussed_mike]

"Military" is by no means the only form a coup can take, and indeed it's just one of the examples in that definition.

This might be the benefit of international distance but it seems to me it is really _unambiguous_ -- based on known facts and no matter which side you come from -- that at the end of 2020 Trump and his DC faction attempted a legislative self-coup:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup

It's at least very arguable that there are ongoing, truly widespread, state-level efforts among his supporters to secure politicised control over the administration of future elections.

You do not need to be left-wing, or anti-conservative, to acknowledge the above. You merely have to make an honest appraisal of what we know (not least based on what various Trump-affiliated political actors have openly said).

I will leave it to others to decide whether Trump met the definition of a fascist, but one tech-related episode that strikes me as instructive on the subject is his attempt to force the sale of TikTok to a company of his choosing if they paid what amounted to a kickback levy to the Treasury.

[vorpalhex]

A coup is via a military or other governmental power structure. When it is citizens, it is an insurrection.

You and I both agree Trump did not have his cabinet members attempt to dissolve Congress or such.

You might have the belief that Trump coaxed citizens into raiding a Congressional building. That would be "formenting insurrection".

> It's at least very arguable that there are ongoing, truly widespread, state-level efforts among his supporters to secure politicised control over the administration of future elections.

No, it's not. At most he has some loud and frothy followers demanding "recounts", which they got and were still disappointed with.

If you actually dislike Trump, do not repeat the mistakes of 2016. Don't paint him up as some master Hitler who is one step away from being dictator for life. Don't bring him up in every topic and let him live rent free. The media did that and he got a better PR campaign then he could have ever bought.

He's just not that smart, nor are most of his followers actually that dedicated. Even "insurrection", while accurate, gives the Jan 6th stunt too much credit.

[unfocussed_mike]

> A coup is via a military or other governmental power structure. When it is citizens, it is an insurrection.

Yes, but you're misunderstanding/misrepresenting what is going on if you think the Capitol insurrection is the entirely of the story. The insurrection was _clearly_ provoked as a single component of a self-coup. There's abundant evidence of this; it's really not in doubt.

> You and I both agree Trump did not have his cabinet members attempt to dissolve Congress or such.

The "or such" is attempting more work here than it can pull off. For example, he and people close to him (like Giuliani) attempted to illegally establish a corrupt slate of electors to throw the election. And he attempted to literally intimidate his Vice President into not certifying at all.

Yes, he was dissuaded from some actions. but he was so much closer to pulling it off than you seem to suggest.

> No, it's not. At most he has some loud and frothy followers demanding "recounts", which they got and were still disappointed with.

Again, you are suggesting that the activity of citizens is the end of it. It is clearly not. It is a multi-state state-level legislative agenda, heavily co-ordinated.

Here is a quite good summary of what is going on:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/23/voter-suppre...

> He's just not that smart, nor are most of his followers actually that dedicated. Even "insurrection", while accurate, gives the Jan 6th stunt too much credit.

You don't seriously think people should believe he did it all on his own and just discount it? It didn't succeed, yes, and he didn't surround himself with the best people, but it was a co-ordinated campaign by many people around him (see the Willard group for example).

In many ways it is still ongoing. If you are content to imagine that Trump and Trumpism are no longer a threat, you are mistaken. Trump may not get to run in person in 2024 (he's clearly dangling this in part so he can claim that his many legal troubles are political persecution), but Trumpism will not be reversed, and minority rule is not off the table.

From a distance, the USA looks increasingly like it is heading towards a very big political reversal from democracy. The GOP certainly won't ever close the lid on everything coming out of Pandora's Box and go back to being a normal political party, and there's no evidence they want to. (They are paying millions of dollars of Trump's legal fees, right now).

It is not a time to pretend things are OK.