7 ms·

It's not unreasonable to see the situation as "Then they came for the Jews, and the administration finally deported the people who were coming for the Jews". T

It's not unreasonable to see the situation as "Then they came for the Jews, and the administration finally deported the people who were coming for the Jews". The president's literal argument for doing it is that the activist groups are coming for all of American life. I'm not a big fan of either side's rhetoric, but clearly the horseshoe has become a ring.

ath3nd 1y ago
> I'm not a big fan of either side's rhetoric, but clearly the horseshoe has become a ring. Either side? Tell me which "side" does that sound like? - hostility towards non traditional sexuality - immigration being used as the scapegoat for economic problems - strong feeling of national exceptionalism - assault on women's productivity rights - politicizing of science - deportation for political reasons - "Roman" salutes It brings parallels with some things happening in Europe some time ago. > activist groups are coming for all of American life. I wonder who's actually going for all of American life though. Let's take Birthright citizenship, which has been established in 1868. Is that American life enough for you? "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." And guess who goes against this American way of life value? An orange grandpa married to an immigrant. You really can't make this up. https://www.npr.org/2025/03/14/nx-s1-5327552/trump-takes-birthright-citizenship-to-the-supreme-court https://www.npr.org/2025/03/14/nx-s1-5327552/trump-takes-bir...
- throwing_away 1y ago
  > Either side? Tell me which "side" does that sound like? Up until you got to the "Roman" salutes, it sounded like both sides in the US. Or rather, it will sound like whichever side you aren't. That's the point. But using "Then they came for the Jews" when you're discussing deportation of these particular people is perhaps a new level of absurdity in the discourse.
  - mmooss 1y ago
    > "Roman" salutes, it sounded like both sides in the US. The liberals / Dems can barely organize a picnic. They can't agree on anything. There is no Fox News, there is nobody they bow down to. The obsequiousness to Trump is unprecendented.
    - throwing_away 1y ago
      https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2025/04/04/picnic-before-rodeo-parade-to-celebrate-justice-and-democracy-san-angelo-equity-alliance/82879751007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2025/04/04/picnic-before...
- brandonmenc 1y ago
  > Let's take Birthright citizenship, which has been established in 1868. Is that American life enough for you? Birthright citizenship was to ensure freed slaves could not be denied citizenship. It's served its purpose and we can repeal it and join the vast majority of nations that don't have this pathway.
  - Braxton1980 1y ago
    And the 2nd amendment was for an armed milita to protect the country.
  - SauciestGNU 1y ago
    Ok, but if we want to repeal it there's a defined process for that. The president doesn't just get to declare people's citizenship invalid, that's Nazi shit. That's why I call Trump and everyone who tacitly or explicitly supports him a Nazi. He's trying to rule by executive fiat to enforce white nationalism.
  - mmooss 1y ago
    If you want to repeal it, then convince your fellow citizens to do that. The president can't do it.
    - brandonmenc 1y ago
      Someone mentioned the 2nd Amendment in this thread. If a president stretched the limits of executive power to go after guns, half of the country would cheer for it. The Constitution is a living document, and the line is constantly pushed back and forth on its interpretation and enforcement.
      - mmooss 1y ago
        > If a president stretched the limits of executive power to go after guns, half of the country would cheer for it. That's speculation about specuation about an undefined interpretation. We are bounded by law, including by the Constitution. > The Constitution is a living document, and the line is constantly pushed back and forth on its interpretation and enforcement. There is variation in interpretation, but within bounds. If you want to eliminate Constitutional gun rights, you would need to repeal the 2nd Amendment.
mmooss 1y ago
It's not at all equivalent. > The president's literal argument for doing it is that the activist groups are coming for all of American life. What is American life? Why can't people criticize whatever they want - that is American life. > "Then they came for the Jews, and the administration finally deported the people who were coming for the Jews" The vast majority of antisemitism is on the right. The administration does nothing about it (and supports and legitimizes much of it). Also, the Jews will be next. By attacking critics of Judaism, they are entrapping Jewish people (and others) in legitimzing this oppression, and in making themselves into targets of hate. Then when the white supremecists turn on them, and say Jews are conspiring to control American, what will these Jewish supporters of arrests, oppression, and deportations say?
- subscribed 1y ago
  But Zionism is not Judaism. Most of the pro-Palestine or anti-Zionist content I see is denouncing Israeli war crimes and genocide. No one is bashing Jews because of their ethnicity or religion. Also a lot of this comes from the Jews (who are then attacked for being confused or..... antisemitic) We're not at the point of people hunting Jews because they're Jews. We are at the point when opposing targeting/killing medics, press, children or hospitals may result in being kidnapped from the street and either locked up without charges or trafficked to the torture camp. I do not disagree with your comment in general, I disagree with you putting "Judaism" while the almost all the critique and rebuke is aimed at the Israeli war crimes or the Zionist supremacy ideology.
  - ath3nd 1y ago
    > I do not disagree with your comment in general, I disagree with you putting "Judaism" while the almost all the critique and rebuke is aimed at the Israeli war crimes or the Zionist supremacy ideology. It's good that you brought this up! It's a common right-wing tactic to conflate themselves with the purest version of something that is highly regarded and hide behind it. E.g the Nazis conflated themselves with "pure" Germanness, the fascists in Italy conflated themselves with "pure" Italianness, the same way now Israel conflates itself with Judaism/Jewishness. Then it naturally follows that if you attack Israel's genocide of the people in Palestine, you are attacking Judaism/Jewishness. If you question Netanyahu's genocidal ultra-supremacist ideology (which many Holocaust survivors, Jewish themselves, have done repeatedly), you are anti-Jewish, and so on. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4OdkaTqmDs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4OdkaTqmDs A similar thing is happening in the US where the current administration is trying to position itself as America-first, so naturally any critique on them must be anti-American, right? You will find that this playbook is always the same. First will be immigrants, then non-traditional sexual orientations and women's reproductive rights, then the press and universities and finally just whoever they feel like. Fortunately, if history goes to show us anything, it's these hate-fueled-orders always end up imploding.
aprilthird2021 1y ago
> The president's literal argument for doing it is that the activist groups are coming for all of American life. American life is defined by the acceptance of dissent and the encouragement of even distasteful free speech. If that's not American, what even is American?
KingMob 1y ago
Horseshoe theory is one of those idiotic centrist oversimplifications that pretends extremist differences don't matter. It's like watching the rebels and the Empire shoot at each other, and saying "There's no difference, because they're both violent."

ath3nd 1y ago

> I'm not a big fan of either side's rhetoric, but clearly the horseshoe has become a ring. Either side? Tell me which "side" does that sound like? - hostility towards non traditional sexuality - immigration being used as the scapegoat for economic problems - strong feeling of national exceptionalism - assault on women's productivity rights - politicizing of science - deportation for political reasons - "Roman" salutes It brings parallels with some things happening in Europe some time ago. > activist groups are coming for all of American life. I wonder who's actually going for all of American life though. Let's take Birthright citizenship, which has been established in 1868. Is that American life enough for you? "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." And guess who goes against this American way of life value? An orange grandpa married to an immigrant. You really can't make this up. https://www.npr.org/2025/03/14/nx-s1-5327552/trump-takes-birthright-citizenship-to-the-supreme-court https://www.npr.org/2025/03/14/nx-s1-5327552/trump-takes-bir...

throwing_away 1y ago
> Either side? Tell me which "side" does that sound like? Up until you got to the "Roman" salutes, it sounded like both sides in the US. Or rather, it will sound like whichever side you aren't. That's the point. But using "Then they came for the Jews" when you're discussing deportation of these particular people is perhaps a new level of absurdity in the discourse.
- mmooss 1y ago
  > "Roman" salutes, it sounded like both sides in the US. The liberals / Dems can barely organize a picnic. They can't agree on anything. There is no Fox News, there is nobody they bow down to. The obsequiousness to Trump is unprecendented.
  - throwing_away 1y ago
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2025/04/04/picnic-before-rodeo-parade-to-celebrate-justice-and-democracy-san-angelo-equity-alliance/82879751007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2025/04/04/picnic-before...
brandonmenc 1y ago
> Let's take Birthright citizenship, which has been established in 1868. Is that American life enough for you? Birthright citizenship was to ensure freed slaves could not be denied citizenship. It's served its purpose and we can repeal it and join the vast majority of nations that don't have this pathway.
- Braxton1980 1y ago
  And the 2nd amendment was for an armed milita to protect the country.
- SauciestGNU 1y ago
  Ok, but if we want to repeal it there's a defined process for that. The president doesn't just get to declare people's citizenship invalid, that's Nazi shit. That's why I call Trump and everyone who tacitly or explicitly supports him a Nazi. He's trying to rule by executive fiat to enforce white nationalism.
- mmooss 1y ago
  If you want to repeal it, then convince your fellow citizens to do that. The president can't do it.
  - brandonmenc 1y ago
    Someone mentioned the 2nd Amendment in this thread. If a president stretched the limits of executive power to go after guns, half of the country would cheer for it. The Constitution is a living document, and the line is constantly pushed back and forth on its interpretation and enforcement.
    - mmooss 1y ago
      > If a president stretched the limits of executive power to go after guns, half of the country would cheer for it. That's speculation about specuation about an undefined interpretation. We are bounded by law, including by the Constitution. > The Constitution is a living document, and the line is constantly pushed back and forth on its interpretation and enforcement. There is variation in interpretation, but within bounds. If you want to eliminate Constitutional gun rights, you would need to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

mmooss 1y ago

It's not at all equivalent. > The president's literal argument for doing it is that the activist groups are coming for all of American life. What is American life? Why can't people criticize whatever they want - that is American life. > "Then they came for the Jews, and the administration finally deported the people who were coming for the Jews" The vast majority of antisemitism is on the right. The administration does nothing about it (and supports and legitimizes much of it). Also, the Jews will be next. By attacking critics of Judaism, they are entrapping Jewish people (and others) in legitimzing this oppression, and in making themselves into targets of hate. Then when the white supremecists turn on them, and say Jews are conspiring to control American, what will these Jewish supporters of arrests, oppression, and deportations say?

subscribed 1y ago
But Zionism is not Judaism. Most of the pro-Palestine or anti-Zionist content I see is denouncing Israeli war crimes and genocide. No one is bashing Jews because of their ethnicity or religion. Also a lot of this comes from the Jews (who are then attacked for being confused or..... antisemitic) We're not at the point of people hunting Jews because they're Jews. We are at the point when opposing targeting/killing medics, press, children or hospitals may result in being kidnapped from the street and either locked up without charges or trafficked to the torture camp. I do not disagree with your comment in general, I disagree with you putting "Judaism" while the almost all the critique and rebuke is aimed at the Israeli war crimes or the Zionist supremacy ideology.
- ath3nd 1y ago
  > I do not disagree with your comment in general, I disagree with you putting "Judaism" while the almost all the critique and rebuke is aimed at the Israeli war crimes or the Zionist supremacy ideology. It's good that you brought this up! It's a common right-wing tactic to conflate themselves with the purest version of something that is highly regarded and hide behind it. E.g the Nazis conflated themselves with "pure" Germanness, the fascists in Italy conflated themselves with "pure" Italianness, the same way now Israel conflates itself with Judaism/Jewishness. Then it naturally follows that if you attack Israel's genocide of the people in Palestine, you are attacking Judaism/Jewishness. If you question Netanyahu's genocidal ultra-supremacist ideology (which many Holocaust survivors, Jewish themselves, have done repeatedly), you are anti-Jewish, and so on. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4OdkaTqmDs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4OdkaTqmDs A similar thing is happening in the US where the current administration is trying to position itself as America-first, so naturally any critique on them must be anti-American, right? You will find that this playbook is always the same. First will be immigrants, then non-traditional sexual orientations and women's reproductive rights, then the press and universities and finally just whoever they feel like. Fortunately, if history goes to show us anything, it's these hate-fueled-orders always end up imploding.

aprilthird2021 1y ago

> The president's literal argument for doing it is that the activist groups are coming for all of American life. American life is defined by the acceptance of dissent and the encouragement of even distasteful free speech. If that's not American, what even is American?

KingMob 1y ago

Horseshoe theory is one of those idiotic centrist oversimplifications that pretends extremist differences don't matter. It's like watching the rebels and the Empire shoot at each other, and saying "There's no difference, because they're both violent."