I think there's a bit of a defeatist fallacy in dissident right communities like this where we tend to think the regime is much more stable than it is.
Agreed, but it's very simplistic to think that you can beat the regime with the regime's own elections - and not because of massive fraud that I don't believe in. There is an entire apparatus in place to make sure those elections mean absolutely nothing. Elections are for the legitimation of the order, not for deciding what policies should exist. Even if you did win an election with a highly competent man who knows how to wield the levers of power, it will always be swimming against the tide, and everything will be swept away the next time around.
Which does not exempt anyone from the duty to resist this great evil, which even in countries like Zimbabwe can entail participation in elections. But you should know what you are up against.
In reality, it's a house of cards, and their increasing willingness to resort to transparent authoritarianism demonstrates just how fragile their hold on power really is.
Regimes tend to overreact to even minor challenges to their power. And obviously, some of it is not overreaction but consolidation based on a phony threat, like the Reichstag fire.
Trump represents the one thing they are most afraid of: a member of the elite, too rich to be bought or bullied, who doesn't subscribe to their worldview. He terrifies them.
Yes, which is why I support him. I don't know why though. They can't buy or bully him, but they could have flattered him into supporting them. They took the worst possible approach in dealing with Trump: attacking him just makes him more defiant and more anti-them.
Remember: he was a DEMOCRAT. I am not sure how many proper convictions he has beyond CHYYYNA BAD. But the regime attacked him and the GOP diehards supported him, and that's why he's with them.
I think what sets billionaire "good guys" like Trump and Elon apart is that they understand the importance of aspiration and freedom of innovation to continued prosperity.
The rest of the elite, even the first-generation, self-made ones like Bill Gates seem obsessed with the idea of consolidating their position by eradicating the middle class. If they destroy people's freedom to innovate, and their ability to be self-sufficient without depending on the elite, they believe they can ensure there will never again be anyone who can dislodge them or compete with them. Only a very few, Trump included, understand that everyone's continued prosperity, including that of the super rich, depends on the freedom to innovate, and that can't exist without a free market of ideas. Not to mention that the elite will never be safe from the underclass without the promise of aspiration: if people don't feel they have any avenue to improve their circumstances and ensure a better future for their children, they will rapidly come to the conclusion that they have nothing to lose.
Trump has some pretty silly ideas, and he wasn't as effective in office as he could have been, but what draws people to him that he clearly and obviously values the same things about American and Western society that ordinary, non-elite people value, and that sets him apart from almost every other billionaire and politician.
Agreed, but it's very simplistic to think that you can beat the regime with the regime's own elections - and not because of massive fraud that I don't believe in. There is an entire apparatus in place to make sure those elections mean absolutely nothing. Elections are for the legitimation of the order, not for deciding what policies should exist. Even if you did win an election with a highly competent man who knows how to wield the levers of power, it will always be swimming against the tide, and everything will be swept away the next time around.
Which does not exempt anyone from the duty to resist this great evil, which even in countries like Zimbabwe can entail participation in elections. But you should know what you are up against.
Regimes tend to overreact to even minor challenges to their power. And obviously, some of it is not overreaction but consolidation based on a phony threat, like the Reichstag fire.
Yes, which is why I support him. I don't know why though. They can't buy or bully him, but they could have flattered him into supporting them. They took the worst possible approach in dealing with Trump: attacking him just makes him more defiant and more anti-them.
Remember: he was a DEMOCRAT. I am not sure how many proper convictions he has beyond CHYYYNA BAD. But the regime attacked him and the GOP diehards supported him, and that's why he's with them.
I think what sets billionaire "good guys" like Trump and Elon apart is that they understand the importance of aspiration and freedom of innovation to continued prosperity.
The rest of the elite, even the first-generation, self-made ones like Bill Gates seem obsessed with the idea of consolidating their position by eradicating the middle class. If they destroy people's freedom to innovate, and their ability to be self-sufficient without depending on the elite, they believe they can ensure there will never again be anyone who can dislodge them or compete with them. Only a very few, Trump included, understand that everyone's continued prosperity, including that of the super rich, depends on the freedom to innovate, and that can't exist without a free market of ideas. Not to mention that the elite will never be safe from the underclass without the promise of aspiration: if people don't feel they have any avenue to improve their circumstances and ensure a better future for their children, they will rapidly come to the conclusion that they have nothing to lose.
Trump has some pretty silly ideas, and he wasn't as effective in office as he could have been, but what draws people to him that he clearly and obviously values the same things about American and Western society that ordinary, non-elite people value, and that sets him apart from almost every other billionaire and politician.
Bill Gates the third, you mean?