286
Are you ready for another Bush v. Gore? The Supreme Court is. (www.motherjones.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/politics@lemmy.world
69 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Examples, please

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Ukraine is probably the most recent example. Russia invaded them but before that they threw their president out purely with people in the street.

    In Egypt they caused a change of governance that wasn't a total improvement but was an improvement.

    In Tunisia and Algeria they got favorable changes in government.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Now do the US

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    1964 civil rights act

    Suffragette movement

    Prohibition

    The original crowd in Boston that started our country

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Yanukovych fled because people started raiding armories and shooting at Berkut. In Egypt the army sided with the protestors. Don't know Tunisia and Algeria off the dome but I doubt there was no violence or threat of imminent violence

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Once you have enough people that is the threat.

    That's what so many people in this thread are missing. Without a visible critical mass of people showing support they're going to be dismissed as a small group of armed dissidents and everyone will stay home and cheer when we kill the terrorists.

    With that critical mass of support the "government" would be forced to either abdicate or deploy force in the most immoral manner possible. Against an overwhelming show of support. Which swings it all the other way. This is why dictators shut down the Internet during protests.

    So they may still get what is clearly their wish. But for the good of the country it needs to be done the right way if Trump steals the election.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

    They don't have any, they just know you're supposed to say "take to the streets" because they think they're a 1960s radical rehearsing boomer protest tactics. As though things might not have changed in the last 60 years.

    Counter-protest tactics have continuously adapted and evolved -- from technology to legislation to media manipulation. Protest tactics have not kept pace, evidenced by the fact that this person thinks street protests have created effective change in the last 20 years.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    If you follow the thread here, this is in a US context (the "we" referenced by the commenter), and it's about "non-violent" protests, given the commenter said violent protests have been "protracted" with "low rates of success." Euromaidan activists seized the government quarter by force and stormed Yanukovych's mansion.

    While I take your point, this isn't a particularly illustrative example in this context.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    No this is exactly what it looks like. They filled the streets and they didn't go into his mansion until he fled after the Army turned on him for using lethal force against the crowd.

    Just like the water hoses and dogs picture was very resonant in the US. The 1964 civil rights act was passed the next year after that photo went viral.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    The 1964 civil rights act was passed the next year after that photo went viral.

    A year is an extraordinarily long time with an illegitimate occupant of the White House, pardoning himself for anything he chooses to do.

    I don't think the measures that were effective during the civil rights era are at all suitable for addressing such a fundamental breach of the constitution.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •