It might seem odd for a totalitarian socialist movement to run with slogans like "Abolish the Police," but it's perfectly consistent with their worldview. They despise the legitimate functions of limited government because they saddle the State with duties to sovereign citizens.
It's no coincidence that people who want to radically expand the size, power, and funding of our already titanic central government usually take a dim view of the things our constitutionally-limited federal system is SUPPOSED to be doing.
A government with sworn duties to all of its citizens is limited in power, especially if those duties take precedence over all the big plans socialists wish to impose through coercive force. Socialism requires unequal treatment by definition. It cannot function otherwise.
If the State has sworn duties to all of its citizens, then it has trouble treating them unequally to impose the elite's notions of "social justice" and enforced equality. Socialism requires the use of force to take money, property, and opportunities from some and give to others.
Police work is a tangible reminder that the State has duties to all of its citizens. The police are supposed to "protect and serve" everyone. They don't ask if you feel like you have a right to loot that TV set from Wal-Mart or take jewelry from a rich woman's house.
The hard Left sees the police as a mercenary army enforcing the privileges of its class and racial enemies. The police are the enforcement arm of the old model of limited government with duties to all of its sovereign citizens.
The socialist vision of an almighty central elite enforcing social justice and income redistribution would have a vast army of enforcers, but they won't be the kind of police we're accustomed to. They would enforce the vision of the state rather than protecting individual rights.
The Left is pretty open about saying that traditional police work is antithetical to their vision of enforced social justice. It's partly a big pander to community-organized inner city constituencies and virtue-signaling upper-class leftists, but it's also part of their ideology.
The hard Left is rather blunt about stating that law enforcement interferes with their business of redressing "grievances" and imposing "social justice." They really hate the way police help create safe communities that don't feel the hot urgency of left-wing social demands.
The police will protect your right to life and property without asking if you "fairly" earned the money in your pocket or "deserve" the property a person with "grievances" is trying to steal. The Left will use its power to replace the police with social justice enforcers. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One of the worst contradictions of our debased republic is that we loudly insist voting is sacred, but we treat the actual ballots like toilet paper: Third World election systems, rampant fraud, clown-show counts and audits, election rules that keep getting looser.
You can't have it both ways. You can't insist voting is such a sacred privilege that it overrides every other consideration, while also treating the votes themselves as worthless junk - protected and counted far less assiduously than every state tracks its weekly lottery tickets.
If voting is a serious business, then it MUST be taken seriously, by both election officials and voters. That means firm rules and real effort for both casting AND counting the votes. Voting must be treated as a solemn duty, not an Internet poll to judge the cutest cat photo.
The Dem student loan forgiveness scheme would turn higher education into an even worse example of Chumponomics: a system that relies on chumps who pay full freight to subsidize those who don't.
Chumponomics is essentially stealth socialism, and it's usually a prelude to open socialism. Socialists deliberately create a crisis of unfairness, then insist their ideology is the only way to resolve it. They did it with health insurance, and they'll do it with student loans.
Open borders immigration policy is a great example of Chumponomics. The people who worked hard and followed all the rules to immigrate legally - investing a great deal of their time, which has a hefty monetary value - get screwed as illegals are waved into the country.
I remember warning at the outset that on a long enough timeline, every crisis becomes a religion. The Church of Covid is fully up and running, complete with heaven-and-hell mythology, devotional practices, and papal indulgences for elites and events with the correct politics.
Beneath all the politics and myth-making lies the simple idea that masks probably help a little, and if they help a little - plus giving people a little psychological comfort in a time of great crisis - they're worth using. If it ended there, we'd be having a rational discussion.
But masks were politicized in the worst possible way, and reason went out the window as a political-religious movement formed around the Wuhan coronavirus. It's easy to see why people fell for it. They desperately wanted to believe they could do SOMETHING to gain control.
Al Gore conceded on Dec 13, 2000. The media treated him as a hero, a great statesman doing one last service for the country he loved so much by gracefully accepting that his challenges would not succeed.
Golly gee, I wonder if they'd give Trump the same coverage on Dec 13 2020.
You young'uns who weren't around for 2000 are probably getting a hilariously cooked and slanted media perspective on what actually happened. Gore, his lawyers, his party, and DNC Media fought bitterly to steal Florida. It was scorched earth.
The media was doing emergency crisis news shows, interviewing people who tearfully swore they meant to vote for Gore, pinky swear, but their poor little heads were twisted all around by those confusing (Democrat-designed) ballots. They were treated like martyrs by the media.
Leaving aside the question of how many might be fraudulent - there's no way ALL of them are - the number of Biden-only ballots combined with huge GOP success downballot makes it pretty clear this election was a thumbs-down referendum on Trump, just as the Democrats wanted.
There's no other way to interpret such a clear signal from voters, and it's not terribly surprising. The coronavirus was a crisis that could take down even the strongest incumbent. It's remarkable Trump did as well as he did - another signal that should not be overlooked.
Mail-in balloting made it incredibly easy for people to take out their anger against the incumbent by filling in a bubble and dropping an envelope in the mail. They were coached and harvested to do so. The outcome is only surprising in that Trump came as close as he did.
Every modern effort to crush free speech begins as a crusade against "disinformation." China's massive Internet censorship apparatus was initially justified as an effort to control the spread of false information, and the Chinese state still describes it that way.
Censors begin by claiming that they only want to control the spread of deliberate falsehoods and push back against propaganda campaigns. They always begin by saying their primary concern is disinformation spread by hostile foreign powers. China constantly says that to this day.
The definition of "disinformation" begins to expand as the censors seek more power. Soon they aren't just going after DELIBERATE falsehoods pushed by malevolent conspiracies - they're suppressing everything from honest mistakes to predictions and "wrong" opinions.