Ha, you downvoted me. Ironic.

Oh and yes the votes do effect visabilty on Lemmy. Some ways of interfacing with lemmy also allow you to see user totals. But that is not the value of votes, the value is in the feedback and interaction on comments.

And in interesting times no less!

I think it also has a lot to do with people in the states just not wanting to know the truth of exactly how far gone their empire really is. I often hear that info silos are at fault but people willingly put themselves into those silos.

We are in the exciting sort of times they talk about in history books, and I am starting to understand that most people actively avoid admitting it.

And wildly dishonest to try and spin every campaign as having some choice on whether or not to deploy violence. To top it off, the flat out writing off of all unsuccessful non-violent campaigns as if they don’t matter (even though most failed campaigns of these types result in people in cells regardless of if violence was employed or not)

They matter to just about everyone not on hexbear (for them it really matters but they tell us it does not).

Yeah, It is wild we still mostly have people talk about the law as if it currently applies in the us for the ruling group.

And unless they have very good parameters there have to be countless non-violent and ineffective campaigns.

If you did this as a ratio of failures over success the non-violent numbers would be sky high compared to the violent ones, the rate of failure would indicate violence is the way.

This whole thing seems like a really wordy way of saying “don’t resist”.

…all violent and nonviolent campaigns from 1900 to 2006 that resulted in the overthrow of a government or in territorial liberation. They created a data set of 323 mass actions.

323, in over 100 years. And they are exuding campaigns that did not work? I would assume there have been 10s of thousands of protests in that time that where non-violent and also ineffective. Why are they not included? What would make a campaign go from non-violent to violent? What constitutes a campaign, is it non-violent in whole or only part? I would check but I need to buy their book.

I can not even think of any movement that resulted in territorial or government change that did not involve some form of violence. This study does not seem to pass the sniff test.

Ehh seems like a stretch, have to assume too many things.

You hope for immortal troops to occupy us cities? I guess you like a challenge.

Same difference really.

Edit: Seems I was not very clear, I am saying its equally as stupid (and destructive) for a party to blame voters as it is to blame non voters. You know since you tend to win elections by having more people vote for you then the other guys so villainizing and alienating voters/potential voters seems counter productive.

Who is downvoting this? Why? Do they disagree that the act was broken? Do they just dislike armed forces being barred from law enforcement?

The whole thing is illegal, but it is still happening. The governor has told them to stand down but here we are.

Because they have been federalized and don’t answer to him.

if invited by that state’s governor.

They are very much not invited by the governor in this case.

Just going to leave this here, on the floor with the rest of the us’s “checks and balances”

Nearly half eh? Yeah less then half checkes out.

Also sunk cost and all that. After all if they admit they are wrong on this what else could they be wrong about? Nope better to just keep “winning”

Or, and here is an idea. Stop putting your grubby American hands on other nations. You are not talking about immigration but some sort of aggressive reverse annexation.