Quote from: SwayStar123 on Today at 05:41:09 PM

Quote from: El duderino_ on Today at 05:26:47 PM

https://twitter.com/sallymayweather/status/1386881393146408960?s=21

People who make these arguments have clearly never heard of Northern Europe

I can shortcut that whole argument by pointing out that countries in Northern Europe have not recently had an executive-branch election stolen with massive ballot fraud. When you are living in a banana republic run by a socialist who stuffed the ballot, “socialism” versus “not socialism” may turn out to be the least of your problems.

For example, before you worry about the economy being flushed down the toilet with tax-and-spend policies, you may want to worry about how El Presidente is turning Dubya’s “War on Terror” machinery of global terrorism inwards. E.g., via Glenn Greenwald:

Quote from: https://outsidevoices.substack.com/p/the-targets-of-bidens-war-on-domestic

The Targets of Biden's War on "Domestic Extremists" May Not Be Who You Think
Illustrating the dangers of the federal government's war on "domestic extremists," animal rights activists are being prosecuted under a capacious definition of "terrorism."

Leighton Akira Woodhouse
[26 April 2021]

[...]

The following year, the animal agriculture industry successfully lobbied the Iowa state legislature to make what Pachaud had done a crime. The law was one of many so-called “Ag Gag” laws in agricultural states across the country, which make undercover investigations on factory farms by animal rights groups unlawful (an estimated 99 percent of animals raised for meat are factory farmed; the very few small family farms that are left are being systematically driven out of business by the industrialization and economic consolidation of the industry). As Ag gag laws effectively criminalize speech, some of the more sloppily written among them have been subject to successful constitutional challenges; Iowa’s 2012 law was among them. In 2019, a federal judge struck down Iowa’s 2012 law.

[...]

As should surprise nobody who lived through the political aftermath of 9/11, these laws were passed under the pretext of combatting “terrorism.” Radical animal rights and environmental activists have, in fact, long been among the FBI’s top “domestic terrorism” targets, as well as targets of draconian new legislation. In 2006, at the behest of the pharmaceutical and animal agriculture industries, Congress passed a law specifically defining animal rights activism aimed at “damaging or interfering with the operations of an animal enterprise” — whether or not violence was involved — as “terrorism.”

[...]

Currently, a bill with 196 Democratic co-sponsors (and 3 Republicans) is before Congress, which would begin to build the legal and bureaucratic architecture for an interagency domestic terrorism response unit within the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security. The legislation is explicitly a response to the Capitol Riot and is pointed particularly at “White supremacist” and “neo-Nazi” groups — a particularly unsympathetic and uncontroversial cast of culprits.

But the PATRIOT Act was also purported to target only the most hateful, murderous people in the world — Islamic terrorists — before it metastasized into a massive surveillance state infrastructure that spied on literally every single American with an internet connection. Are we to expect that a domestic analogue to the PATRIOT Act will draw the line at violent sociopathic racists? The intelligence community demonstrably does not: a recently declassified report lists animal rights and environmental activists, abortion activists on both the pro-life and the pro-choice sides, anarchists, and anti-capitalists as potential domestic terrorist threats.

Whoops!