“Struggle sessions” are literally Maoist revolutionary re-education sessions. This is exactly what our POWs in Vietnam were subjected to...being paraded out publicly...and forced to admit and renounce their privilege/complicity with racism, imperialism, colonialism... it’s evil.
Struggle sessions are a ritualistic shaming where an opponent is paraded before a crowd and forced to repeatedly incriminate themselves and make politically correct statements. The goal is demoralization of both the individual and audience, and ideological fealty.
@Icantev34017597 Hate isn’t the answer. You don’t have to want to execute political enemies. You can let go of your bigotry and hatefilled emotive rage.
In America we have two parties of government. Unfortunately we also have two separate justice systems. If the insurrectionists had been Black, they would have been shot
trump is essentially neutralized. No opportunity to recruit, motivate, or agitate his base to act as domestic terrorists. He will use Parler, but it is a joke compared to Twitter and Facebook.
@Icantev34017597 Here’s you, calling for the death penalty for someone who used a lawful process in a constitutionally guaranteed and protected manner (the speech and debate clause) to seek to ensure election integrity.
Odd to read my former prof say so in light of historic commentary. It is clear that many presidents do appropriately tell congress how to exercise power, from the veto pen to use of the bully pulpit. We’ll see if you again become as consistent as you were in 2008, going forward.
It is far from clear to me that an incoming President should be telling Congress how to exercise their power—especially a power that is specifically designed to check the office of the president.
@Icantev34017597 It’s sad to see you endorse fascism. I had hoped you were not an authoritarian after all and actually cared about unifying the country. But I see you care for destruction and dissipation of those you hate.
2/2 rather than quelling unrest and reinforcing the rule of law. I don’t see an imperative to comment on such things by Biden, but if he is a unifying Captain with his hand on the tiller, perhaps it’s a missed moment.
1/2 Hello! Fond memories there! Yes, indeed it is different, and the presidency and its additional now-accompanying Wilsonian/Prussian administrative executive state, has grown truly imperial. None the less, a faction can overreach, &can do more to harm through radicalization...
@Neb19832 Hello former student!
I’d say the veto power is significantly different since it’s explicitly given to the president in the Constitution.
And I thought my tweet was sufficiently clear that impeachment is different than other policy issues because it is designed to check the Pres
3/3 missives of support & encouragement endorsing the use of political violence including attacks on federal courthouses/property (not to mention thousands of privately owned buildings burned consequentially) throughout the past “summer of Dem love, unity and lawful conduct”.
1/3 I wouldn’t say unprincipled. Perhaps “selective” with the slinging of arrows. The heaviest criticism has been focused for quite some time in one particular direction. Example: the conflation of “go down to the Capitol” with “go storm the Capitol” is loose (cont)
@Neb19832 Happy to engage further on the issue here. And I’m also very interested to hear how, precisely, you think this comment is different than other comments that I’ve made in the past. You are suggesting that I’m unprincipled, and I certainly hope that I’m not.
2/3 with my understanding of the technical definitions of “incitement”, and is made perhaps a little boldly, particularly in the context of the relative silence which deafened me when political actors of another stripe made arguably more egregious pre-and post facto (cont).