“(With) today’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed. For all practical purposes, there are virtually no limits on what the president can do. It’s a fundamentally new principle and it’s a dangerous precedent because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law even including the supreme court of the United States.”
Throughout his address, Biden underscored the gravity of the moment, emphasizing that the only barrier to the president’s authority now lies in the personal restraint of the officeholder. He warned vehemently against the prospect of Trump returning to power, painting a stark picture of the dangers such an outcome could pose.
the people who failed to stop facism are obviously not the same as fascists themselves.
Superior Orders, or ignorance of what is happening, does not absolve one of responsibility.
Since the 2020 election cycle began, “fascism” took on a plethora of new meanings, none of which actually accessed the ongoing material conditions surrounding the rise of fascism outside of the Republican Party. In fact, one could easily conclude that “fascists” and “republican” were interchangeable words if they paid close enough attention to the elections. But they are not. The confusion around fascism, weaponized by liberals to drive people to the voting polls, has disallowed any inspection of the primary role the Democratic Party (with its neoliberal, populist, and austerity police state policies) has played by sheltering and coddling this current iteration of fascism. source
Again, that is not the claim that was made. You can’t even stay on topic. I bet Marx could stay on topic .
Marx abused alcohol, so not sure. The Republicans are capitalists. The Democrats are capitalists. To Marxists they are the same. Liberalism fails because it cannot address the contradictions inherent to capitalism, inequality and wealth accumulation. Capitalism requires inequality for wealth accumulation.
Social democratic reforms can alleviate the inequality and distribute the wealth more equitably, but, because it does not replace capitalism itself, it always falters.
So, although Democrats and Republicans differ on social policy, they both defer to capitalism. Capitalism rules both parties.
The Republicans are capitalists. The Democrats are capitalists. To Marxists they are the same.
Meaningful, important distinctions can exist even when Marxists are unable to recognize them.
Social democratic reforms can alleviate the inequality and distribute the wealth more equitably, but, because it does not replace capitalism itself, it always falters.
Explain? Because systems ultimately fail , it’s no good? Longevity and risilience are worthwhile considerations when designing and economic system to govern a civilization, but uktimate fallibility does not invalidate them entirely. More to the point, what evidence is there that Marxists societies do/would last longer?
