“This is fascism. They support it. Act accordingly.”
This is a bold statement of moral clarity which, of course, leads to dramatic actions. Can the nation survive or do we become another Yugoslavia destined to shatter into irreconcilable shards of violence and resentment? Does moral clarity demand an inevitable moral response? I am envisioning the partitioning of India and the disastrous suffering and carnage that resulted and the murderous animosities still roiling today. Will another wall have to be built between “Red” and “Blue” Americas?
I was stationed in Germany in the 60s and witnessed the progress of Allied “denazification” still a work in progress 20 years after the end of the war. It was an amazing act of moral clarity that allowed no ambiguity in the focus of its purpose. Still today, it is against the law in Germany to support fascism. Nazi fascism was defeated and rooted out by authoritarian martial law. Is a Civil War and martial law the inevitable outcome of embracing moral clarity? My eyes seach the horizon to find a less volatile exit ramp but none are in sight…
Democrats need to stop saying "Republicans need to condemn this political violence." Instead, Democrats need to clearly state that Republicans support political violence and that this isn't about politics as usual.
They have been taught to hate democrats since Reagan said ‘the L word” and Rush Limbaugh called us ‘libtards’. We’ve been at this for 40 years. They know.
Points well made, yet there is more: yes, many have been cowed into resignation and fear, without actually believing anything pertinent. On the other hand, "No Kings" has brought out and stiffened resistance and opened a window we need to exploit full-on: that the police power you aptly describe is what brought immigrants here in the first place -- from countries overwhelmed by fascist forces funded by corporations. Please read that sentence again; it is at the heart of of our must-do, at the heart of our responsibility as democrats (small "d") and as Americans. The turnout for rallies across the country is tremendously heartening, and we need to run with it, expound on it, elevate it. We do not need riot police in the streets to contain patriotic celebrations of our First Amendment rights. The only proper reaction to that is "WTF"? The only violence on Saturday was incited by police; the murders in Minnesota were inspired by MAGA. Stand up for the rule of law.
Matt Taibbi comes to mind. You should right an article about him and perhaps Shellenberger and other independent journalists who have an enormous Trump shaped blind spot on their authoritarian radar.
I’m an independent in politics. I was married to someone with narcissistic traits who gaslighted and manipulated every situation she could. I did not know how bad it was. The Democrats and the media have engaged in gaslighting and manipulation for the last 10 years like I’ve never seen before. I have seen the left. Sit there and just lie in front of people’s faces, via interviews and etc. All you’re doing is making it worse by just blaming Trump. I don’t like everything he’s doing but when you say he’s gaslighting and manipulating it’s the Democrats who are doing that.
It's unfortunate that Mike Brock is political Zealot. For what, I'm not sure... He writes with 💯 certainty that he is correct. What is very, very disturbing about his pov is that he is eager to condemn members of our families, people who we work with, our neighbors, our loved ones as dupes of the opposition just because they may not agree with his strident political beliefs. He doesn't even know us or them. His words are dangerous.
Mr. Brock preaches a "philosophy"of how we should reject our friends, neighbors, coworkers, family members and loved ones who may use different words or phrases to describe our fraught times as they understand them.
His approach is a blue print for creating more polarization and civil strife. His philosophy was enacted in the French Terror, Stalin's Public Trials, Nazis propaganda, Mao's cultural revolution, the Red Scare, Joseph McCarthy and ironically, his philosophy dovetails beautifully with MAGA-FASCISM.
In short, bigotry breeds bigotry whether it is religious, political, ethnic, etc, etc, etc....
Please don't be convinced by his polemic. His words are compelling and HE IS WRONG.
We need to reach out to the millions of people who want to live comfortable lives, who consider themselves moderates , independents or liberals, even conservative Republicans are approachable.
Reach out to the people in your life who may have voted differently than you. Use empathetic listening, don't fact check, acknowledge fears and anger and highlight the notions of justice, kindness, tolerance, honesty, due process and human rights and democratic values.
The book on 'How to Have Impossible Conversations" by Peter Boghossian
and James Lindsay is a good antidote to Brock's wretched intolerance.
I hope that Mike Brock studies the book. He just may decide that a politically broad UNITED FRONT is the best way to defeat Maga-Fascism. There is still time and opportunities to build bridges among people who may hold different povs, and that is a democracy.
You've just provided a masterclass in precisely the sophisticated enabling I described. Let me walk you through what you've done here.
You begin by acknowledging that fascist gaslighting is 'true of many'—but not all, of course. You're too sophisticated for such broad generalizations. Then you proceed to demonstrate exactly the rationalization process I outlined: elaborately justifying support for ethnic cleansing because you have policy disagreements with Democrats.
COVID lockdowns were too strict? Fair enough. Immigration policy needs reform? Reasonable position. Economic inequality is real? Absolutely.
Your response? Support mass deportation raids against American cities.
Do you hear yourself? You're treating policy disagreements as equivalent to constitutional demolition. You're suggesting that because some people felt inconvenienced by public health measures, mass deportation of families is a proportional response.
This isn't analysis—it's apologia. You're performing exactly the intellectual gymnastics I warned about, where legitimate policy concerns become elaborate justifications for supporting the unjustifiable.
'Both sides will need to make concessions,' you say. What exactly should the 'concession' be to ethnic cleansing? Should we deport families only on weekends? Should we use gentler language while separating children from parents?
You invoke Gaza—correctly noting the horror there—then somehow use it to rationalize identical horrors here. 'What's to stop us from treating immigrants like Palestinians?' you ask, while describing your understanding of why people support exactly that treatment.
Your entire response is the shell game in literary form: acknowledge the horror while providing eighteen different reasons why supporting it is actually quite reasonable given the circumstances.
Every fascist movement in history has exploited legitimate grievances. Economic anxiety built the Nazi base. Cultural displacement fueled ethnic cleansing across continents. The existence of real problems has never—NEVER—justified authoritarian solutions.
You know what's not a legitimate response to being asked to wear masks? Supporting federal troops against civilians.
You know what's not a proportional reaction to disagreeing with vaccine mandates? Cheering ethnic cleansing.
You know what doesn't justify mass deportation raids? Literally nothing.
Stop performing sophisticated analysis while enabling fascism. Stop treating constitutional democracy as just another policy preference to be negotiated away when you're unhappy with other policies.
Some things don't have two sides. Some positions don't deserve intellectual respect. Some choices reveal character rather than just political preference.
Supporting ethnic cleansing because you didn't like COVID policies isn't reasonable. It's monstrous. And dressing it up in 'both sides' rhetoric doesn't make it less monstrous—it just makes you complicit in making it seem normal.
Glad it uses the word “perceived” because that proves what I already know, their perception is not based in reality. All those things you mentioned are manufactured issues by the GOP and the MSM.
You have to admit that the hysteria about the response to a pandemic that took more lives here than anywhere else in the world was pretty weak (a million lives) especially considering our government lied about it for over a month and the guy in charge kept downplaying it. You also have to admit that the hysteria about less than 1% of the population’s lifestyle and who just want to live their own way (you know that thing we call freedom) is pretty weak. And you also have to admit that the hysteria about immigrants pouring across the border only when certain people are the President is pretty weak. Especially considering that one party has been calling it a crisis for 20 years without evidence and uses it to scare weak minded people.
Finally, anyone that calls other human beings “illegal” is clearly morally depraved and weak.
I’m not going to debate this nonsense because your premise is completely false demonstrating clear bias and ignorance. The same COVID vaccines were used in several other countries around the world and they had less deaths because people did not have a leader who had no clue what they were doing in handling a crisis and undermined his own people. The cause of death in America is because we have lots of uneducated morons who believe lies. For example, believing that COVID would just go away instead of listening to the scientists like Dr. Fauci who was villainized as some kind of monster when he provided clear guidance on how to save people, and believing lies like the response to dealing with COVID was some kind of totalitarian takeover, which it was not.
All your assertions are based on lies which gives you the false perception I was talking about.
“This is fascism. They support it. Act accordingly.”
This is a bold statement of moral clarity which, of course, leads to dramatic actions. Can the nation survive or do we become another Yugoslavia destined to shatter into irreconcilable shards of violence and resentment? Does moral clarity demand an inevitable moral response? I am envisioning the partitioning of India and the disastrous suffering and carnage that resulted and the murderous animosities still roiling today. Will another wall have to be built between “Red” and “Blue” Americas?
I was stationed in Germany in the 60s and witnessed the progress of Allied “denazification” still a work in progress 20 years after the end of the war. It was an amazing act of moral clarity that allowed no ambiguity in the focus of its purpose. Still today, it is against the law in Germany to support fascism. Nazi fascism was defeated and rooted out by authoritarian martial law. Is a Civil War and martial law the inevitable outcome of embracing moral clarity? My eyes seach the horizon to find a less volatile exit ramp but none are in sight…
Democrats need to stop saying "Republicans need to condemn this political violence." Instead, Democrats need to clearly state that Republicans support political violence and that this isn't about politics as usual.
This! Because we are long past the point of bi-partisanship and expecting somewhat will never happen only makes us look week.
The clearest definition of what I have known in my gut and now my broken heart. Thank you
An honest assessment of where we are as a nation.
They have been taught to hate democrats since Reagan said ‘the L word” and Rush Limbaugh called us ‘libtards’. We’ve been at this for 40 years. They know.
Valuable work.
This is the way.
Points well made, yet there is more: yes, many have been cowed into resignation and fear, without actually believing anything pertinent. On the other hand, "No Kings" has brought out and stiffened resistance and opened a window we need to exploit full-on: that the police power you aptly describe is what brought immigrants here in the first place -- from countries overwhelmed by fascist forces funded by corporations. Please read that sentence again; it is at the heart of of our must-do, at the heart of our responsibility as democrats (small "d") and as Americans. The turnout for rallies across the country is tremendously heartening, and we need to run with it, expound on it, elevate it. We do not need riot police in the streets to contain patriotic celebrations of our First Amendment rights. The only proper reaction to that is "WTF"? The only violence on Saturday was incited by police; the murders in Minnesota were inspired by MAGA. Stand up for the rule of law.
Matt Taibbi comes to mind. You should right an article about him and perhaps Shellenberger and other independent journalists who have an enormous Trump shaped blind spot on their authoritarian radar.
Well said. Thank you. This message needs to be really internalized widely and if/when it is, we will see more and more "no kings" style resistance.
I’m an independent in politics. I was married to someone with narcissistic traits who gaslighted and manipulated every situation she could. I did not know how bad it was. The Democrats and the media have engaged in gaslighting and manipulation for the last 10 years like I’ve never seen before. I have seen the left. Sit there and just lie in front of people’s faces, via interviews and etc. All you’re doing is making it worse by just blaming Trump. I don’t like everything he’s doing but when you say he’s gaslighting and manipulating it’s the Democrats who are doing that.
It's unfortunate that Mike Brock is political Zealot. For what, I'm not sure... He writes with 💯 certainty that he is correct. What is very, very disturbing about his pov is that he is eager to condemn members of our families, people who we work with, our neighbors, our loved ones as dupes of the opposition just because they may not agree with his strident political beliefs. He doesn't even know us or them. His words are dangerous.
Mr. Brock preaches a "philosophy"of how we should reject our friends, neighbors, coworkers, family members and loved ones who may use different words or phrases to describe our fraught times as they understand them.
His approach is a blue print for creating more polarization and civil strife. His philosophy was enacted in the French Terror, Stalin's Public Trials, Nazis propaganda, Mao's cultural revolution, the Red Scare, Joseph McCarthy and ironically, his philosophy dovetails beautifully with MAGA-FASCISM.
In short, bigotry breeds bigotry whether it is religious, political, ethnic, etc, etc, etc....
Please don't be convinced by his polemic. His words are compelling and HE IS WRONG.
We need to reach out to the millions of people who want to live comfortable lives, who consider themselves moderates , independents or liberals, even conservative Republicans are approachable.
Reach out to the people in your life who may have voted differently than you. Use empathetic listening, don't fact check, acknowledge fears and anger and highlight the notions of justice, kindness, tolerance, honesty, due process and human rights and democratic values.
The book on 'How to Have Impossible Conversations" by Peter Boghossian
and James Lindsay is a good antidote to Brock's wretched intolerance.
I hope that Mike Brock studies the book. He just may decide that a politically broad UNITED FRONT is the best way to defeat Maga-Fascism. There is still time and opportunities to build bridges among people who may hold different povs, and that is a democracy.
Shalom
People need to see the areas that are being targeted and attacked, and defend them.
They are attacking real places and they are the places that fascists have identified as the strongest defense against them.
While Democrats look for swing votes, Republicans are using military forces on the people and neighborhoods which have been Democrats base.
Corporations get what they want, these neighborhoods who have there for the Democrats are about to get the boot to the face.
Ask MAGA when they are going to start obeying like North Koreans.
https://youtu.be/NqPqdi3orzQ?si=Eewp0XOwyHr_oMBi
You've just provided a masterclass in precisely the sophisticated enabling I described. Let me walk you through what you've done here.
You begin by acknowledging that fascist gaslighting is 'true of many'—but not all, of course. You're too sophisticated for such broad generalizations. Then you proceed to demonstrate exactly the rationalization process I outlined: elaborately justifying support for ethnic cleansing because you have policy disagreements with Democrats.
COVID lockdowns were too strict? Fair enough. Immigration policy needs reform? Reasonable position. Economic inequality is real? Absolutely.
Your response? Support mass deportation raids against American cities.
Do you hear yourself? You're treating policy disagreements as equivalent to constitutional demolition. You're suggesting that because some people felt inconvenienced by public health measures, mass deportation of families is a proportional response.
This isn't analysis—it's apologia. You're performing exactly the intellectual gymnastics I warned about, where legitimate policy concerns become elaborate justifications for supporting the unjustifiable.
'Both sides will need to make concessions,' you say. What exactly should the 'concession' be to ethnic cleansing? Should we deport families only on weekends? Should we use gentler language while separating children from parents?
You invoke Gaza—correctly noting the horror there—then somehow use it to rationalize identical horrors here. 'What's to stop us from treating immigrants like Palestinians?' you ask, while describing your understanding of why people support exactly that treatment.
Your entire response is the shell game in literary form: acknowledge the horror while providing eighteen different reasons why supporting it is actually quite reasonable given the circumstances.
Every fascist movement in history has exploited legitimate grievances. Economic anxiety built the Nazi base. Cultural displacement fueled ethnic cleansing across continents. The existence of real problems has never—NEVER—justified authoritarian solutions.
You know what's not a legitimate response to being asked to wear masks? Supporting federal troops against civilians.
You know what's not a proportional reaction to disagreeing with vaccine mandates? Cheering ethnic cleansing.
You know what doesn't justify mass deportation raids? Literally nothing.
Stop performing sophisticated analysis while enabling fascism. Stop treating constitutional democracy as just another policy preference to be negotiated away when you're unhappy with other policies.
Some things don't have two sides. Some positions don't deserve intellectual respect. Some choices reveal character rather than just political preference.
Supporting ethnic cleansing because you didn't like COVID policies isn't reasonable. It's monstrous. And dressing it up in 'both sides' rhetoric doesn't make it less monstrous—it just makes you complicit in making it seem normal.
Glad it uses the word “perceived” because that proves what I already know, their perception is not based in reality. All those things you mentioned are manufactured issues by the GOP and the MSM.
You have to admit that the hysteria about the response to a pandemic that took more lives here than anywhere else in the world was pretty weak (a million lives) especially considering our government lied about it for over a month and the guy in charge kept downplaying it. You also have to admit that the hysteria about less than 1% of the population’s lifestyle and who just want to live their own way (you know that thing we call freedom) is pretty weak. And you also have to admit that the hysteria about immigrants pouring across the border only when certain people are the President is pretty weak. Especially considering that one party has been calling it a crisis for 20 years without evidence and uses it to scare weak minded people.
Finally, anyone that calls other human beings “illegal” is clearly morally depraved and weak.
I’m not going to debate this nonsense because your premise is completely false demonstrating clear bias and ignorance. The same COVID vaccines were used in several other countries around the world and they had less deaths because people did not have a leader who had no clue what they were doing in handling a crisis and undermined his own people. The cause of death in America is because we have lots of uneducated morons who believe lies. For example, believing that COVID would just go away instead of listening to the scientists like Dr. Fauci who was villainized as some kind of monster when he provided clear guidance on how to save people, and believing lies like the response to dealing with COVID was some kind of totalitarian takeover, which it was not.
All your assertions are based on lies which gives you the false perception I was talking about.
Generally curious here. What line do you think was crossed with Transgender kids, COVID and lax immigration policies.
Can you provide specific examples with evidence that shows they crossed that line?