• ulkesh@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Neither am I. MAGA asshats can go screw off. They want to destroy this country. I don’t condone assassination unless truly warranted (talking overt, doubtless genocide as an example), I sure as hell don’t commiserate with MAGA just because of this incident.

  • TehBamski@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    You don’t have to be a MAGA worshiper to be a decent human being that doesn’t want someone to be killed by a random person, because of their beliefs or talking points. That being said… I want to hear that Trump died in a federal prison of natural causes.

  • ninjabard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m not condoning what was done. It truly is awful what happened. However, you spout hateful, phobic, misogynistic, ableist rhetoric since the 2016 campaign? Maybe don’t be surprised.

  • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    No. We may all be Americans, but MAGA is an alt-right hateful term, and I will never align myself with that.

    We can align as Americans and condemn violence, but that means condemning all violence.

    • GulbuddinHekmatyar@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      No. We may all be Americans, but MAGA is an alt-right hateful term, and I will never align myself with that.

      We can align as Americans and condemn violence, but that means condemning all violence.

      / seriously Well, have ye heard of the term “chickens coming home to roost”? I think that’s what Trump had coming for him, I guess…

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Genuinely, if Trump is a genuine risk to democracy and risks increasing support to Israel, why must he be defeated in a vote? Like, if he becomes Hitler 2 and erases democracy and ups the genocide, is that okay with you because he won the vote?

      • acastcandream@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        He must be defeated in a vote to send a clear message he is not wanted/has no mandate. He can cry “stolen election” all he wants, he won’t be in charge, and after 2 presidential losses and 2 disastrous midterms the GOP will move on. Eventually he has to win or he has no power.

  • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’ve seen the author on political shows in the UK. She’s the worst kind of right wing hack and her opinions are worthless.

  • jinarched@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I condemn such political violence, but I wouldn’t have shed a single tear for Trump.

    Fuck MAGA. Fuck Trump.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Why condemn it? Violence is an unfortunate tool, but a tool nontheless, and abandoning it when oppressors use it without care just means you aren’t taking things seriously. Hitler should have been assassinated.

      • _NoName_@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        By weighing all violence as immoral you are not ruling it out completely. You make it a last-resort, where you avoid one great injustice with a lesser injustice - a lesser injustice which you still face consequences for.

        The alternative is morally sanctifying some murders, which leads to ‘morally justified’ murders being done by all political sides (since they each view themselves as ‘the moral ones’), and which eventually gets twisted into the party in power murdering their opponents with impunity because it’s ‘morally justified’.

        • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Moralism itself is just a tool to justify the status quo. Nothing is inherently good by maintaining “civility,” especially if violence is the status quo.

          Shooting Nazis is good. Shooting Gazans is bad. Violence is a tool, but not always the correct one, nor is it never correct.

          • _NoName_@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I think that is a misreading of why moral codes come into being, and I am not trying to preach moralism.

            Moral codes are not universal truths, but instead rules of engagement for maintaining order within a system, and they exist within every social social scope, though their level of detail tends to decay as the scope becomes more interpersonal. They’re not really a tool of the state, but instead just a human tool. The state just codifies its own and disseminates it into the social collectives it rules.

            My statement above is a moral observation about political morality within the US, and which I view is generally a useful rule within any democratic political system (I am referring to systems which have a structure and voting system associated with democratic processes, not necessarily ideal or actual democracies).

            I am also not saying that this moral code is necessarily good for us or the system itself at any given moment, but stating why this moral code exists in the first place, and why anyone who is apart of our system and wants that system to survive (whether that be for avoiding personal turmoil or political ideology) will continue to condemn assassination attempts from any side.

            • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Moral codes are not universal truths, but instead rules of engagement for maintaining order within a system, and they exist within every social scope, though their level of detail tends to decay as the scope becomes more interpersonal. They’re not really a tool of the state, but instead just a human tool. The state just codifies its own and disseminates it into the social collectives it rules.

              Yes, moral codes are generally arbitrary. When wielded by the state to maintain the status quo, it becomes a tool of the state.

              My statement above is a moral observation about political morality within the US, and which I view is generally a useful rule within any democratic political system (I am referring to systems which have a structure and voting system associated with democratic processes, not necessarily ideal or actual democracies).

              The US isn’t truly democratic. Both major parties serve the interests of their donors, ie huge Capitalists, and the candidates presented fit with that alignment. In this manner, political pressure outside the scope of “civility” is presented as immoral, despite civility itself being used to perpetuate anti-democratic structures.

              I am also not saying that this moral code is necessarily good for us or the system itself at any given moment, but stating why this moral code exists in the first place, and why anyone who is apart of our system and wants that system to survive (whether that be for avoiding personal turmoil or political ideology) will continue to condemn assassination attempts from any side.

              Yes, this is why Biden has batted more for Trump than any child murdered in Gaza. Biden needs civility to remain, or else he too will become a target.