Those are the things that allowed it to become this size
100% true
This is all backwards.
Not sure where you got this part, since what you just said is precisely what I said
; there’s nothing that says they have to stay because of its size, and the size could shrink to accommodate the new functioning (or lack thereof) of the courts.
Also true
The US, for better or worse, really is a very distributed system. It's the only possible way that a single endeavor can grow to this size, you just can't have it all centrally managed and have anything at ground level still make any sense or get done well. It also has a pretty valuable property that a lot of the people operating it really believe in the mission of what they are doing. Prosecutors believe they're putting bad people away, grand juries believe they're making decisions about justice, National Guard people believe they're protecting the country. It's not always true (which carries its own variety of problem), but quite a lot of the time, it actually is (partly because it's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy as people are motivated to fix it at the local level if things go off the rails).
Trump doesn't understand any of that, which is why even medium-sized enterprises he's ever been involved with have always been a clusterfuck. And now he's driving the world's biggest robot, and surprise surprise, the controls aren't simple and it's not doing what he wants. We're just lucky that this decades-in-the-making fascist coup came to its climax with Angry Facebook Grandpa at the wheel instead of someone who knew what the fuck they were doing. Even Trump is having quite a bit of success with it. If it had been someone qualified, we'd have no chance at all I think.
Rule 1 of the kakistocracy: It's never the boss's fault. He has to be in charge of everything, he can't be questioned on anything, but it's never his fault when things go wrong.
I think it is virtually certain that he types that way in direct messages
relative to everything else
Not even remotely what I said. I'm pretty sure I actually said specifically that the "everything else" was going to be vital. I think you should read to understand, not to confirm.
then they ratfuck our guys literally every single time
I didn't do that. Someone else did, and fuck those guys. It's a massive problem. Activism to fix that is absolutely vital, showing up and voting and nothing else is kind of pointless (again, definitely at this point).
The point is that giving up on elections completely means that it's all ratfucking and no citizen input into formal politics. That's why I compared it with getting vaccines: Whatever you're worried about as the theoretical health impacts, it is astronomically better than not doing it.
I get what you're trying to say that I'm coming off harsh, but if an apartment building burned down and some families died and a lot more were homeless, and after that I heard someone talking about how they took the batteries out of their smoke detector (in the same building) because they think it's better not to have them in, I would have the same reaction.
You seemed to be going off on it pretty viciously
I mean I'm not purely trying to. It does upset me though. See the smoke detector analogy.
I was repeating something i had heard, that I specifically stated was not my position.
You said, "I personally am of the opinion that voting isn’t very important. I think it distracts from real action." Right?
Edit: Moderated the language, I don't need to be all mean about it. You may be right about that part.
If you think me telling you my point of view and what's an important tactic to employ, in blunt terms, is "sowing division," I don't know what sort of diverse communities you have worked in before. I have worked together to build something with people very unlike me. I can do okay at it, I had to learn a lot. Presumably, if you work with activists, you're accustomed to it too: Having strong disagreements about things, talking with people who you don't see eye to eye with. Right? Maybe not.
There is a crisis going on right now. I am trying to wake you up to one vital tool to use to try to set a better course in the future, minimize the crisis and bring it to a less dangerous place and recover a better future. Sorry if I hurt your feelings but people are dying right now. All you can see is me in terms of "enemy" because I don't see things like you do, it sounds like, or be upset because I am talking bluntly about this upsetting situation. I would say, take your own advice: You need to learn to read to understand rather than confirm.
You shouldn’t be so quick to write them off! They could teach you a lot, and you could do a lot to support each other.
They're not mutually exclusive. Real world non-electoral politics is going to be necessary to get us out of this mess (especially now), and it also leads to a good and fulfilling life. There's something magic and human that happens with the people around you when you are fighting for something that's actually worth fighting for, I've seen it.
There's absolutely no reason in the world why it needs to be one or the other. Absolutely none. Unless you just like having a much harder challenge to overcome in your day to day activism, wondering if those people who you come into contact with are going to get "deported" or just never seen again.
I can understand why someone who relies on high morale to keep functioning and puts a high value on truth wouldn’t consider it worth the chronological and emotional costs.
Meanwhile, a bunch of people stuffed into an ICE facility in Louisiana without lawyers, medical care, edible food, all kinds of stuff, don't give even the tiniest flying fuck whether it was worth the "emotional costs" for you to keep them out of that situation.
It's interesting you bring up the 2000 election, too. That's one of the inflection points where the whole fuckin' world could have been different based on the results of the election.
What do you mean? I'm not disagreeing, just asking, how is Erdogan being a piece of shit a big problem for them? I'm sure they don't like it, but he doesn't like them either, so fine.
Honestly that sounds like more work than Trump or the current crew of leadership wants to do. I think what they're planning is more likely to be just to keep blowing up fishing boats and blustering until (a) Venezuela caves or (b) they get distracted and just abandon the effort for some other equally pointless and violent activity.
I also think it's very bizarre their constant complaining that the suspect isn't "cooperating."
What is it that they expect him to do? I have a guess, of course. The way it usually works (after the suspect initially agrees to talk with them without a lawyer, creating all kinds of problems for themselves), is that they build the case, and the lawyer who's now in touch with the client finally has a chance to tell them to shut the fuck up going forward. My guess is that they really want him to "cooperate" with building their case for them, and he's not, and that upsets them because it's giving them real problems.
If we assume this random YouTube man is credible, and I see no reason to doubt him, the DOJ can't even tie suspected Kirk killer to the actual killing of Charlie Kirk.
What?
What was the thing you repeated that you had heard, but that isn't actually your position? I'm just confused by this.
Not really trying to give you a hard time, I get what you're saying about me coming on super-strong about it and I apologize about any kind of harshness. Like I say, it's just an important issue for me that is connected with real world harm, so I feel like if we can have a slightly upsetting conversation and then be set up for action that can help prevent some massive material harm in the world, that's okay.