[a4a4a4a4]

No, I don’t think I will stop it, until people start to realize the democrats are doing the same thing. Also, what an authoritarian response for someone claiming not to be authoritarian.

The Democrats are actively ignoring Supreme Court rulings (Bruen case and the Hochul administration in NY doing exactly what the Supreme Court told them they could not do, which was to declare the entire state a “sensitive location”).

The Democrats also redraw voting districts as they like, just as they accuse the republicans of.

You have states like CA intentionally leaking the names, addresses and purchase lists of gun owners.

The entirety of “social authoritarianism” belongs to the democrats.

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/561825-comedians-are-ri...

[toss1]

Right, acting like attempting some minor painting around the edges of trying to implement sensible gun restrictions to mitigate the onslaught of mass murders is somehow implementing authoritarianism.

Acting as if it is the same as the leader of a party claiming that "I am your retribution!"?

Acting as if it is the same as attempting to pass laws to require registration of anyone who writes about the govt and govt officials?

Acting as if it is the same as implementing laws to restrict other states from providing legal medical services, and using the entire state and commercial surveillance apparatus to criminally prosecute people who get medical treatment they don't like?

Directly writing laws that restrict teaching of actual history and other subjects they don't like?

This isn't small govt, this is authoritarianism.

In a free society, all of the institutions are relatively independent and in a balance of power and freedom, from the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of govt, to the press, the academy, industry, religions, etc. Under authoritarianism, all of these institutions are coerced into service of the executive.

The Rs are actively coercing all of the other institutions into their service. The Ds are doing the exact opposite (I have plenty of issues vs Ds in other time periods, but this is the situation today).

Even on gerrymandering, the Ds are trying to pass national laws to use actual representative districting, the Rs arent. I cannot fault them for doing it defensively, and I guarantee you if offered a deal to stop it in EVERY state, the Ds would sign up that week, and the Rs would filibuster it to death. The Rs only hold the house because of massive gerrymandering.

If you cannot see any of that, you are beyond help. Just don't pretend to be some kind of even-handed, above-the-fray commentator. You are posting straight-up authoritarian apologias.

[a4a4a4a4]

> minor painting around the edges of trying to implement sensible gun restrictions to mitigate the onslaught of mass murders is somehow implementing authoritarianism.

This is exactly what I’m talking about. Just because it doesn’t affect you it’s “not that bad.” It is that bad. It is not “minor”. NYS is openly defying a Supreme Court Order, infringing on constitutional rights, saying “I don’t need data to prove (these laws) will change anything”, while citing racist laws from the 1800s as proof that their restrictions have history.

Antonyuk v Bruen: NYS Defense of the “good moral character clause” is “ From the early days of English settlement in America, the colonies sought to prevent Native American tribes from acquiring firearms”. But that’s fine justification for you, because you don’t like guns. NYS literally defended its requirement for character references with a CT law from the 1800s that said “any free negro who wishes to carry a firearm must obtain character references from several white neighbors, attesting to his character and temperament”. If this was any other topic, the dems would be decrying this racist rhetoric, but instead they’re the ones pushing it forward and standing behind it, while pretending to be the arbiters of racial equality.

I’m not disagreeing with you on the republicans poor behavior. But if you think the dems are the saints here and are “upholding democracy, law and order” or something, then I don’t think you can be helped. You’re just as blind as the republicans followers, and doing the same “frothing at the mouth” that they do about how bad the other side is, while ignoring pretending your side is the savior.

Also on the gerrymandering, here, also from a source you’ll probably like: https://www.vox.com/22961590/redistricting-gerrymandering-ho.... Don’t pretend the dems would change anything about this.

[toss1]

On Gerrymandering, even the article you cite has a sub-head specifically describing how the Dems are doing it defensively / responsively. You just count the maps and I think you'll find that the Dems should take any gerrymandering-disarmament deal in a heartbeat, because they are losing. They may claw their way back to parity, but you can't level the same accusation.

On voting, more critically, who is trying to pass laws enabling voting, and who is passing laws restricting voting? Ds are trying to get more voting, and Rs are restricting it, restricting times, polling locations, even banning people handing out water in voting queues (which wouldn't exist if they weren't trying to restrict voting. In democracies, voters elect their leaders, in autocracies, the leaders select their voters, which is what Rs are doing.

For the sake of discussion, even if I grant you 100% that NYs actions on gun control are not legal, those will get sorted UNDER THE LAW, and rolled back, and penalized.

Meanwhile I do see Ds doing zero and Rs doing ALL of these pre-authoritarian steps, identical to those in pre-authoritarian Germany 1930s, Chile 1970s, & Hungary & Turkey 2000s:

— Threatening to use the state to jail enemies (Trump from "Lock her up!" chants to most recently at CPAC)

— Infringing 1A free speech, requiring registration of writers

— Actively and pre-emptively denying valid election results

— Infiltrating police departments and the enlisted ranks of the military

— Taking over school boards and local boards of elections

— Banning books

— Burning books

— Firing principals and teachers who defend multiracial, multicultural democracy while banning books that contain such “dangerous” ideas

— Demonizing queer people and outlawing drag shows (again infringing 1A rights)

— Demonizing Jews and blacks

— Actively and completely rewriting history, in particular January 6th

— Gerrymandering states so regardless of how people vote, Republicans control the levers of power

— Changing election laws so they can both make it harder for city-dwellers to vote and to ignore and then change the outcomes of elections they don’t like

— Building media structures that will support the authoritarian takeover when it happens

— Organizing armed paramilitary militias, with back-channel connections to local police

— Creating legal organizations to sanitize and rationalize ending messy democracy

— Spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories about Democrats and Jews using the dog whistle of “George Soros”

— Firebombing Texas Democratic Party’s Austin headquarters and threatening them that if they don’t stop trying to get Democrats elected worse will come

Sorry, a4a4a4, but the Ds are doing exactly zero of this

False equivalency is a lie. What you are doing is called "whataboutism", simply attempting to deflect the conversation from the crimes of your side to avoid accountability and change. Or, perhaps you really are merely fooled. Rethink, because you've got next to nothing convincing.

[a4a4a4a4]

Standard democrat playbook:

1) "Look what they're doing and how bad it is" 2) "We would never do something like that" 3) Do something like that. 4) "What do you mean we're doing that? This is 'whataboutism', we were talking about how terrible the other group is!"

I hope you will come around some day. I'm equally worried about the authoritarianism of both parties, and can't decide which dystopia I'd rather live in. Option A: No right to self-defense but having abortion rights, letting violent criminals out on $0 bail. Option B: A right to self-defense but living in a country which wants to legislate based on religion.

[toss1]

Also, can you tell me where, just where, ANY Democrat or independent is propounding a Big Lie, that an election was illegitimate, when such claims were litigated and DENIED=LOST in over 60 state and federal courts of law - ZERO courts upheld ANY allegation, yet almost every R and an entire RW mediz circus propounds this Big Lie about who won the election. Where is ANY Dem doing such a thing?

Moreover this behavior extends to denying that the violent January 6h insurrection was "merely tourists". Again, nearly every R and an entire RW media circus is propounding such lies. Yet there is zero equivalece anywhere else on the rest of today's political spectrum.

Calling our "whataboutism" is NOT simply complaining that you are complaining that Ds do similar stuff. It is that you attempt to deflect the conversation by calling out DIFFERENT, IRRELEVANT faults. Of course anyone can find faults, it's the easiest thing in the world to do. Clever of you to try to say that claims of "whataboutism" are merely complaining about getting called out for the same thing, but it is not the case. j

I note that you have claimed only that "Ds also do bad stuff", never acknoweledged any of the the wholesale list of outright R moves to authoritarianism, and never actually cited anything remotely similar to R authoritarian actions. Show some actual equivalence or you are merely running interference for actual authoritarianism.

If there is some ACTUAL meaningful (and plausible, not merely some powerless loon saying nonsense) moves by Ds towards real authoritarianism — undermining independence of branches of govt, the press, the academy, religions, industry, or bringing religion into govt — I'm all ears. But I've heard nothing but a small complaint about one state maybe overreaching on gun restrictions.

Seriously, I'm all about authoritarianism vs democracy, but I need real evidence.

[toss1]

Please show me the list of what Dems are doing that even close to resembles the above list of what Rs are doing. Seriously.

I grew up in an R household, cast my first vote for an R POTUS candidate, and wrote the software that ran the 1996 R national convention (invited back, but the company had moved on to a different focus). I got a very intimate inside look and crash course during that '96 project.

These Rs are nothing like the current Rs. Back then, it was literally "Big Tent", and they were very concerned when Buchanon won some primaries, as those were uncompromising 'crazies'.

Today's crop is literally the inmates running the asylum.

Seriously, where are Dems attempting to RESTRICT the vote, or restrict anything else?

Where are they actually infringing on 2A "as part of a well-regulated militia"?

I've seen noting that is more than common-sense requirements so that literal lunatics can't get weapons of war as easily as a hamburger. I live Massachusetts, one of the most restrictive states, and it is nothing more than an inconvenience (3 hour course, regular bkgd check), and no, I can't have an AR-15, which is a weapon for people who can't shoot straight (literally designed for that). Oh, and airguns are entirely unregulated, so I can get a gun firing a 50-grain .45-caliber pellet at 900 fps with around 400 foot-pounds of energy without any question.

My personal view on gun restrictions is that it should be regulated by increasing firepower and firing rate. Kid's .22? Just a safety course and test, and you're good to go. More courses and tests of safety & marksmanship as firepower increases. By the time you get to AR-15++ (and I think ++ should go up to just short of WMD and NBC weapons), you'll have to prove high levels of skill, safety, psychological stability, and have insurance. And, when licensed, you'll be subject to militia call-up. Freedom, and responsibility as part of a well-regulated militia. Claiming that 2A means that any random angry nutjob can buy any weapon anytime is just lunacy, and it kills people by the hour.

No one is talking about no right to self-defense. Again, in the strictest state of MA, I can have a very nice arsenal. What we don't have is random mass shootings.

You are right about the "country which wants to legislate based on religion", but vastly understating it. Just go look at some of the literal Christo-fascist movements. You also overlook that under R authoritarianism, the right to self-defense will only be available to white males.

There is, and I've not seen you cite any even partial equivalence on the Dem side. I also see on the Dem side clear movements against the $0 bail, and the "Defund The Police" movement was effectively shut down, and the POTUS is strongly pro-police.

Yes, there are some pushing for "$0 bail", but two things. First, this is not autocracy, it is idiocy. Second, those rapidly get shut down, as people realize that living crime-free is also kind of a right that needs to be enforced.

As far as I can tell, the Ds are about PERMISSION and building, not locking down everything for the state.

Please show me where the Ds are actually doing anything like the list I presented of live, current R activities and bills that take away people's rights.

EDIT: add 2nd-to-last para.