Well there’s a good chance I’ll die in a Trump concentration camp, so might as well make the best of it.

Shoot to kill any intruders that invade your home without a warrant.

If ICE Gestapo thugs invade your home without a warrant, be a hero. Exercise your second amendment right.

Well if you aren’t an accelerationist, then why would you point to Egypt as a positive example? Ousting a brutal dictator, ushering in a short era of political instability and violence, and then ending up with another brutal dictator - it seems to me Egypt is a prime example of accelerationism gone wrong.

But more broadly, I feel you didn’t answer my original question. I agree if we can get there through reform, we should try. But we have been trying. We’ve been trying - and mostly going backward - for at least 40 years.

If reform is impossible, then it is the reformists who are accepting the fascist agenda without a fight. If reform is unlikely, then it is the reformists who are helping the fascists win.

So what makes your possible reform any more likely than the reformists that have come before you? How can you be sure that your position isn’t helping fascists win?

Oh so you’re saying we need violent coup of the American government in order to make progress? That makes sense.

It seemed like you were suggesting we could get ICE Nuremberg trials through the electoral process. That is a fantasy.

And what are the people going to do about it? Vote harder? Protest?

We did all that in 2008, and Obama still let the war criminals go free.

So if you honestly believe this situation will be different, please explain how it is different.

Just like how Obama punished all the war criminals when he got into office, right?

Comparing a rigorous Philosophy degree to an internet argument is something said only by the uneducated.

Philosophy is the spearhead of science, most scientific breakthroughs begin first with philosophy.

Anyone suggesting that the US is too sexist to elect a woman president has to explain the election of Claudia Sheinbaum.

By every metric I can find, Mexico is more misogynistic than the US. You can look at crime statistics on domestic violence, rape, murder; or opinion surveys showing men’s negative attitude toward women – all the stats coming out of Mexico are worse.

Yet somehow, Mexico overwhelmingly elected a woman (a Jewish woman in an 85% Christian population, too).

My hypothesis is that policy matters much more than the gender of a candidate. Kamala had absolutely pathetic policy proposals, supporting the status quo of corporate economic domination and a foreign policy soaked in innocent blood. but maybe I’m biased.

They wasted their supermajority by passing a right wing healthcare bill.

Instead of ending the wars as promised, they did a troop surge.

They bailed out wall street while doing little to help working americans.