Second ('Third') Trump Presidency Thread
- Thread starter thethe
- Start date
This is the same information we’ve had all along?
This is just naked authoritarianism, by the way.
I’m shocked that someone who asks me what a woman is every few weeks has so openly embraced such a radical change to the definition of terrorism.
I don’t need gangs to be re-branded as terrorists to be opposed to gang violence or to be in favor of deporting gang members, but I think this is all a bit of a stretch when it comes to the commonly understood meaning of terrorism. Doesn’t make them any less bad, just different. We just have much broader leeway when it comes to terrorism because of 9/11.
You’re describing gang violence, a thing we have always recognized as bad. I don’t really even take issue with the Trump Admin declaring them terrorists. If I have any qualms on the law side, it’s that we afford the government too much authority to combat terrorism when other types of violence are just as or more disruptive to Americans.
Well, I guess we know now that if Dems win again that you’ll agree that science and language are fluid and it’s fine if President AOC is just following the will of the people and imprisons someone in El Salvador for mis-gendering someone. After all, winners determine what the law is.
Unless you lose, in which case I get to decide what reality is. It’s a fun ruleset you’re providing me here.
I don’t think many on my side are particularly concerned with the etymological implications of classifying gangs as terrorist organizations actually. More of a niche argument than a leftist talking point.