The Democrat Party Hates America

[Immanuel Can]

Absurd.

More correctly, Socialists, being believers in dialectics, hate all things status quo and seek their destruction in the name of "Historical progress."The Dems are strongly influenced by Socialism, and see the future as being Socialist. So they hate all things status quo, and seek their destruction in the dialectical conflict which will allegedly produce progress.

Why do you think the Dems support rioters who burn cities, and hate cops? For Socialists, all "existing orders" are always "oppressive," and all deserve to be "problematized" and then destroyed in the name of "liberation" from "systemic oppression."

America is a status quo entity. It's part of the world that already exists, a system of governance, economics, institutions, beliefs, cultures, and so on. It's oppressive, and must not be "made great again," but rather torn to pieces in order to produce Socialist "progress." Therefore, the Dems hate it.

More reasonable.

What's reasonable about hating all that exists, destroying everything we've built, and blinding trusting an imaginary "god" called "History" to save us all from our folly?

[Alexis Jacobi]

I’m done with your question and issue.

?

On this forum I write about my idea in relation to the topics that come up here. I wrote what I did in relation to a topic, not because I desire to interchange with you. My impression of you is that you are empty of ideas and substantial content (so there is no point). Capice?

[promethean75]

"What's reasonable about hating all that exists, destroying everything we've built, and blinding trusting an imaginary "god" called "History" to save us all from our folly?"

Bro that's exactly what the antediluvian people asked when God flooded the erf.

[Immanuel Can]

"What's reasonable about hating all that exists, destroying everything we've built, and blinding trusting an imaginary "god" called "History" to save us all from our folly?"

Bro that's exactly what the antediluvian people asked when God flooded the erf.

Let's suppose, just for argument's sake, that you're right: that doesn't make it better for the Socialists -- it makes it even worse. I mean, if there were a "god" or "gods" that the Socialists simply didn't know about, maybe History would magically progress when we destroy things. The real "gods" would be doing it, but we would think it was the great god "History." Still, at least "progress" would be expectable.

But if there's no great god "History" at all, then Socialism is just a product of blindly destroying the status quo, with no reasonable expectation of "progress" at all.

So which way do you want to be wrong?

[FlashDangerpants]

Henry wrote

“In his 4 years, my lil ORANGE GRENADE did nuthin' dictator-like: prove me wrong.”

One example should prove HQ wrong. That’s all I’m submitting. Address anything else if you like and discuss with anyone else.

The bigfatorangebabyman, or as he is also know Cheetonixon. Made a long list (220) of undemocratic executive orders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e ... nald_Trump

Would it be fair to say that executive orders are an instance of authoritarianism?

No, executive orders are often just the expected result of a presidency working against a hostile congress which is something to expect for at least 2 years in any two term presidency.

What marks Trump out as a wannabe dictator is a single EO that he issued late in his term and which he is expected to reissue straight away if reelected. Executive Order 13957 makes thousands of career civil servants across the executive branch of government easy to fire and replace with loyalists.

What marks Trump as a dictator in waiting is that he was scandalised to discover that his government was staffed by persons who had sworn oaths not to him but to a constitution, and that he fully intends to reverse that situation once restored to power.

[Immanuel Can]

What marks Trump out as a wannabe dictator is a single EO that he issued late in his term

So...Trump is a "wannabe dictator" for issuing a single executive order late in his term? And he's a "wannabe dictator" for possibly eliminating the jobs of various unelected swivel serpents?

But because the swivel service is staffed by Democrats, it's not "dictatorship"? And Biden does EOs and they're sweetness and light, but when Trump did this one, he became a dictator?

Sorry, my dear...I'm having a little difficulty following the argument you're supposed to be making there.

[FlashDangerpants]

Sorry, my dear...I'm having a little difficulty following the argument you're supposed to be making there.

Yeah, well that was expected. You drank the Kool Aid on day 1.

[Immanuel Can]

Sorry, my dear...I'm having a little difficulty following the argument you're supposed to be making there.

Yeah, well that was expected. You drank the Kool Aid on day 1.

You're so silly. I'm not an American. I have no affinity with Trump, either way. I just call 'em the way they are.

But it is interesting to see you lapse so utterly into binary, conspiratorial thinking: "He disagrees with me; he must love Trump."

[commonsense]

More correctly, Socialists, being believers in dialectics, hate all things status quo and seek their destruction in the name of "Historical progress."The Dems are strongly influenced by Socialism, and see the future as being Socialist. So they hate all things status quo, and seek their destruction in the dialectical conflict which will allegedly produce progress.

Why do you think the Dems support rioters who burn cities, and hate cops? For Socialists, all "existing orders" are always "oppressive," and all deserve to be "problematized" and then destroyed in the name of "liberation" from "systemic oppression."

America is a status quo entity. It's part of the world that already exists, a system of governance, economics, institutions, beliefs, cultures, and so on. It's oppressive, and must not be "made great again," but rather torn to pieces in order to produce Socialist "progress." Therefore, the Dems hate it.

More reasonable.

What's reasonable about hating all that exists, destroying everything we've built, and blinding trusting an imaginary "god" called "History" to save us all from our folly?

Your post is more reasonable, fair or even-handed than a previous riff.

[commonsense]

The bigfatorangebabyman, or as he is also know Cheetonixon. Made a long list (220) of undemocratic executive orders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e ... nald_Trump

Would it be fair to say that executive orders are an instance of authoritarianism?

No, executive orders are often just the expected result of a presidency working against a hostile congress which is something to expect for at least 2 years in any two term presidency.

What marks Trump out as a wannabe dictator is a single EO that he issued late in his term and which he is expected to reissue straight away if reelected. Executive Order 13957 makes thousands of career civil servants across the executive branch of government easy to fire and replace with loyalists.

What marks Trump as a dictator in waiting is that he was scandalised to discover that his government was staffed by persons who had sworn oaths not to him but to a constitution, and that he fully intends to reverse that situation once restored to power.

More accurate would’ve been to cite some executive orders.

[commonsense]

What marks Trump out as a wannabe dictator is a single EO that he issued late in his term

So...Trump is a "wannabe dictator" for issuing a single executive order late in his term? And he's a "wannabe dictator" for possibly eliminating the jobs of various unelected swivel serpents?

But because the swivel service is staffed by Democrats, it's not "dictatorship"? And Biden does EOs and they're sweetness and light, but when Trump did this one, he became a dictator?

Sorry, my dear...I'm having a little difficulty following the argument you're supposed to be making there.

I never commented on Biden’s EOs. Only some are dictatorial.

[commonsense]

I’m done with your question and issue.

?

On this forum I write about my idea in relation to the topics that come up here. I wrote what I did in relation to a topic, not because I desire to interchange with you. My impression of you is that you are empty of ideas and substantial content (so there is no point). Capice?

I have no idea what you mean by Capice?

[FlashDangerpants]

Would it be fair to say that executive orders are an instance of authoritarianism?

No, executive orders are often just the expected result of a presidency working against a hostile congress which is something to expect for at least 2 years in any two term presidency.

What marks Trump out as a wannabe dictator is a single EO that he issued late in his term and which he is expected to reissue straight away if reelected. Executive Order 13957 makes thousands of career civil servants across the executive branch of government easy to fire and replace with loyalists.

What marks Trump as a dictator in waiting is that he was scandalised to discover that his government was staffed by persons who had sworn oaths not to him but to a constitution, and that he fully intends to reverse that situation once restored to power.

More accurate would’ve been to cite some executive orders.

I gave you the link directly to executive order number 13957 and I explained why most people think it's the bad one. What extra accuracy do I need above that?

You can bet your bum hole that if that was a Biden EO then IC would have a whole fit about how fascist it is.

[commonsense]

No, executive orders are often just the expected result of a presidency working against a hostile congress which is something to expect for at least 2 years in any two term presidency.

What marks Trump out as a wannabe dictator is a single EO that he issued late in his term and which he is expected to reissue straight away if reelected. Executive Order 13957 makes thousands of career civil servants across the executive branch of government easy to fire and replace with loyalists.

What marks Trump as a dictator in waiting is that he was scandalised to discover that his government was staffed by persons who had sworn oaths not to him but to a constitution, and that he fully intends to reverse that situation once restored to power.

More accurate would’ve been to cite some executive orders.

I gave you the link directly to executive order number 13957 and I explained why most people think it's the bad one. What extra accuracy do I need above that?

You can bet your bum hole that if that was a Biden EO then IC would have a whole fit about how fascist it is.

Do you not see the complementary nature of my comment?

[FlashDangerpants]

Do you not see the complementary nature of my comment?

No. In what way was it complementary?