this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2024
1181 points (100.0% liked)

196

16453 readers
1980 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 27 points 3 months ago (5 children)

but also because him dying doesn't solve the problem. people forget that he's actually unpopular. him getting replaced would benefit the party. and the real problem is the entire fascist party. their agenda won't change with TFG dying.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Huh? Yeah, he's unpopular but voter turnout is such arse, that there is rarely a blowout capable of preventing electors from playing silly buggers with counts.

If he's dead, who inherits his mantle and has a likely shot at getting enough popular votes that US fascists can pretend they won but were narrowly cheated?

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

the problem is how unpopular Biden is right now

[–] Holzkohlen@feddit.de 11 points 3 months ago

Long term it would help the party. In the short term it would hurt them. I expect a LOT of infighting is gonna happen once Trump is gone.

[–] suction@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No No you’re getting it wrong, Trump is the thing that gives that whole fascist movement its structure. Taking him out of the game is akin to turning the light on in a room full of cockroaches

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] suction@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Have to disagree. The “if I had a Time Machine I’d go back and kill Hitler” trope is there for a reason. Once the charismatic leader is gone, the movement will crumble in short time.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

but Hitler is gone, and fascism is surging around the world, and has been steadily gaining since WW2.

also Hitler and TFG are not in the same situation. one brought about Nazism, the other didn't. the republican party was fascist before him, and will be after him.

he didn't make them fascists, he just emboldened them to be more brazen and direct about it because he proved there are no safeguards or real consequences to literally be against democracy in the US. him dying won't change that. once the door is unlocked, destroying the key won't lock it back.

[–] suction@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

There was a 80 year break after AH was gone… And fascism is surging because Putin was and still is able to use the internet to do what Goebbels did for the Nazis. He’s the actual leader of the new fascist movement, Trump just hopped on his bandwagon. The people who feel emboldened by fascist leaders are always there, but they only become a problem when they can group behind “their guy”. So if that guy is gone, they go back to being passive fascists. Of course it would be better to have none such people around, but thinking pragmatically, that’s not an option, we first need to get back to the baseline by taking down the leader.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

i don't know how old you are, but I'm guessing you're young because there was no 80 year break.

there wasn't any break.

as i said, Hitler lost the war but fascism didn't. the US became more and more of a fascist country. police state, corporate power, mass incarceration, mass surveillance, invasions and endless wars...

there has been some progress too, but it has always been outpaced by fascism. and corporate power always grew. fascism isn't just when a bitch baby loser screams into a mic.

[–] Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 months ago

Yeah, Trump is a stupid target and this is bad timing. Now if someone had gone after the Supreme Court a year or three ago, that would've been a good thing. Even now it might still be. But Trump? Terrible choice of targets. He's...his relevance has already happened. It's too late for his death to be positive in any significant way.

Hell, I suspect that it might boost the Republican candidate, whoever is selected to replace him, unless they wind up having a really nasty fight where various supporters get extremely entrenched against each other. But that's not likely - Republicans are very tribalist, once they select a candidate, most of them are going to support him, regardless of how badly they were speaking of him five minutes ago when they were in full support of his opponent.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

Jesus fucking Christ, you people insist everything would be better for the bad guys.