• Skiluros@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    22 hours ago

    American politics has sides. There is no use pretending it doesn’t. But both sides are meant to be on the same side of a larger project — we are all, or most of us, anyway, trying to maintain the viability of the American experiment. We can live with losing an election because we believe in the promise of the next election; we can live with losing an argument because we believe that there will be another argument. Political violence imperils that.

    And if there is no next election? Keep in mind that both russia and Turkmenistan formally do have elections and the russians even have fake communist parties.

    Mind you I am not saying what one should or shouldn’t do. That’s up to every individual. But to assume that the US is immune to basic human dynamics is the height of arrogance.

    • criss_cross@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      22 hours ago

      The problem with the sides argument is that the “larger project” is a core part of it. You need both sides to work in good faith.

      I argue the right have been abusing that for the last decade to advance their agenda unscathed. They have NOT been working in good faith and we’re living in the aftermath. When your current leader keeps saying the system is rigged when he doesn’t win and advocates violence and military occupation to get what he wants it doesn’t really look like it’s working towards a “larger project”. People are jaded that the system no longer works.

    • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      We can live with losing an election because we believe in the promise of the next election

      How does bussing people in for J6 fit into that equation?

      Edit: was that Kirk or one of the other right wing shitheels?