Here’s the original use of “the people”


↪Tobias

Obviously the people. These people shook up the system. I don’t have to like them to see that.
— Brett

But what is 'the people' in this case. I always get itchy when 'the people' are mentioned, because it is usually an appropriation by a small group who claims to represent them,
— Tobias


You’ve taken that line out of context. The line was in response to frank who asked whose side I was on.

Who's side are you on?
— frank

Obviously the people. These people shook up the system. I don’t have to like them to see that.
— Brett

By the people I mean:

Left or right it’s the people against a heartless system.
— Brett

If that is the case then why when I mentioned the assault here:

We must call this out for what it is: a deliberate assault on democracy by a sitting President and his supporters, attempting to overturn a free and fair election." — Brett

(specifically referring to those who attacked the capitol.)

did you reply with:

The one thing all politicians fear: the people asserting themselves — Brett

And why won't you just condemn those people who attacked the capitol now?

I had to make it clear to Tobias and now you because you interpret it the way that suits you.

did you reply with:
The one thing all politicians fear: the people asserting themselves
— Brett — Baden

Because it’s true.

Notice Brett's hapless attempt to pretend he didn't say what he said or wasn't referring to who he referred to is belied by the fact that he still won't condemn the terrorists in question. Case closed.

What’s happened to you Baden? You were so reasonable once. Now you’ve become an alley dog along with @StreetlightX and @Xtrix

I'm an alley dog because I asked you to condemn the terrorists who attacked the capitol? Forget everything else. Just condemn them. Go on.

How hard could that be for someone who says they're not on their side? Even Ted Cruz could manage it. If you can't, we'll draw the obvious conclusions.

And he wonders why I'm not eager to give him the attention he is demanding. — Hippyhead

I didn't challenge you. I asked you a simple and civil question:

Question: do you know of any responsible spokesperson for the Trump right? Is there anything even arguably correct coming out of the Trump right? Anyone at all? Anything at all? — tim wood

You said you had already answered and I could go look for it if I cared to read it. I did and found that you had not answered. I called you on that and you gave me your FU, and I returned it.

Question still stands. You appear to be an apologist for Trumpism. But my question was to identify anyone from Trump land making sense: who and what sense. Apparently you do not know and taking it as some kind of challenge are too immature to say so. Well, I do not know of any such spokesperson, or any such content, and I suspect there isn't any.

But you've shot yourself in your own foot by being non-responsive to and evasive of a simple question. Why would you do that?

Just condemn them. Go on. — Baden

“The Crucible” by Arthur Miller

“ The second reason that Scene 5 is pivotal is because Abigail exerts her power and begins her quest to obtain Proctor. Unsurprisingly, Tituba confesses to witchcraft when the townspeople threaten her with physical violence. She is a black female slave, an individual without any power. She cannot hope to defend herself against Abigail's accusations, even though she and Abigail both know that Abigail is lying. The fact that Tituba confesses to witchcraft and then implicates Sarah Good and Goody Osburn reveals that Tituba listens very well and values her life. In order to preserve her own life, Tituba takes cues from her interrogators and tells them what they want to hear. Hale's response to Tituba's confession prompts Abigail's own sudden admission of guilt.

Declaring witchcraft becomes the popular thing to do. It grants an individual instant status and recognition within Salem, which translates into power. Abigail realizes that she can achieve immediate respect and authority by declaring that she has consorted with the Devil but now seeks redemption. Abigail's manipulation of the circumstances demonstrates her keen sense of self-preservation, as well as a unique understanding of the blind ignorance of others. Abigail knows that the townspeople will view her as an expert witness. The fact that Hale believes her sets her far apart from the other people in Salem. The people forget Abigail's questionable reputation and now consider her an instrument of God. https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/c/the-crucible/summary-and-analysis/act-i-scene-5

So - the current news is, the Democrats will definitely introduce a motion to have Trump removed from office under Article 25. It has to be approved by Mike Pence. If he doesn't approve, they have Articles of Impeachment drawn up and could vote on them by Wednesday. As the House has a democratic majority, and as at least some Republicans have indicated support, it is likely to be passed, making Trump the first president to be impeached twice.

But the Senate Trial will be held back for a few months, so as not to derail the initial weeks of the new Administration. And the cooked goose will be allowed to twist ever so slowly back and forth in the breeze, awaiting the verdict of a Senate which by the time it convenes, will have an effective majority of one vote.

If Trump is convicted, he will not be able to stand for public office again.

How under right do you make someone else publish your words? — tim wood

These are tech companies, not publishers, Tim. Your question is a stupid one. — NOS4A2

Educate. How is my question stupid?

I see, we're not allowed call anything terrorism because of Arthur Miller's play, "The Crucible". Terrorism no longer exists when it's right-wingers doing it! Hurrah! No responsibility for them! It's excruciating watching you squirm like this and even more so watching you abuse a work of art while you do it. I'm finished with you. You're on my ignore list. But if you, or anyone, promotes terrorism here (so far you've equivocated), you'll still be banned in a shot and don't even think we're going to indulge any more of you playing the victim.

My message for Trump terrorists and their supporters, including on this site, is simple: Fuck off and die. — Baden

Seconded. Proudly.

I’d say the same to the hijackers of 9/11 and their supporters and enablers.

If these people want a civil war, they’ve got it. It’s their funeral.

But if you, or anyone, promotes terrorism here (so far you've equivocated), you'll still be banned in a shot and don't even think we're going to indulge any more of you playing the victim. — Baden

I haven’t promoted it.

If these people want a civil war, they’ve got it. It’s their funeral. — Xtrix

Oh you hero.

Just like Trump the Capitol Building rioters have exposed who you really are.

Keep defending domestic terrorists Brett. You hero. Noble work.

Still haven’t seen any evidence of me defending or promoting domestic terrorism on this forum.

What’s happened to you Baden? You were so reasonable once. Now you’ve become an alley dog along with StreetlightX and @Xtrix — Brett

Please. Rationality and politeness don’t apply to those who, for example, storm buildings shouting “hang Pence” because they believe in a fantasy.

The appropriate response is utter contempt.

No, no, no. You don’t get away with that sleight of hand. I was talking about Baden’s attitude to posters, not the rioters.

Still haven’t seen any evidence of me defending or promoting domestic terrorism on this forum. — Brett

Yet given the opportunity to outright condemn it, you pull a Trump, then cite the Crucible.

Fine people on both sides, I hear.

Not reading any more of Brett. Thing about the extreme right is they are so entitled, they really think they are the victims if anyone stops them doing or saying whatever they want, whether that be infecting people with COVID, storming buildings to "assert" themselves, or refusing to condemn terrorism. And when confronted they cry and whine like babies and complain you're not being polite enough to them.

I’m not obliged to tell you what my politics are. You seem to have missed the point of “The Crucible”

Thing about the extreme right — Baden

So now I’m the extreme right. This has escalated fast.

Those celebrating the censorship of the right - the mass shut-down of social media accounts and the restricted access to to entire social media platforms like Parler - need to be very, very, careful what they wish for — StreetlightX

Free speech has never encompassed the right to say whatever you wish at my dinner table, nor does it include the right to speak with impunity.

In any event, the power of mass media has always rested in the hands of the few. Historically, you first must have had a printing press, then the ability to print large scale newspapers and fliers, then access to the radio waves, then to the television waves and then to cable and such. Because market entry was difficult, the owners generally held to an ethic to be truthful, at least in the West.

This modern problem of giving every Tom, Dick, and Harry access to mass media via Twitter, Facebook and the like is something that must now be grappled with. The solution, as is now evident, is not to allow a free for all. I have no problem with the owners of mass media doing as they always had in the past: publishing only that which meets proper editorial standards. Such worked for probably 1000 years prior to tweets and insta posts.

Hm, I'm on your side now v Street. Something is very wrong. :gasp:

Yes, this applies to those who, rather than explicitly condemn the actions outright, offer nothing but qualifications and excuses. While also not outright supporting what was done, of course — which allows for plenty of worming out of what’s plainly obvious.

You’re fooling no one except yourself. I have no doubt you believe you’re simply seeking the truth.

I guess the thing is that Trump voters aren't after betterment of the lives of the poor because that would include poor black people, poor hispanic people, poor women, poor gay people, poor Muslims, poor atheists... The Capitol coup was incredibly WHITE considering it wasn't a race issue. I wonder if it's not just that poor people have some Nietzchean resentment toward the projected ideal, but these white people in particular believe that they are owed it, and decades of attempted social reform followed by attempted regression have left them feeling they've been owed it for a very long time, entire lifetimes of generations passing on the IOU. Meanwhile their out-groups have seemed to receive increases: civil rights, feminism, gay rights, trans rights. These people are trying to get to where white men are at but white men see it as a concession: we are losing and those are gaining. — Kenosha Kid

I think that’s pretty on the mark.

I’m a white man, more or less , and both my grandfathers were insanely better-off than I am, even though one of them was an orphan adopted by (European) immigrants. Almost any black person or woman of their era would probably have been much worse off in many ways compared to black people and women of my generation. So if I were the kind of person who thought that pirates prevented global warming (i.e. a person who doesn’t understand the difference between correlation and causation), I could see jumping to the conclusion that my losses compared to my grandparents are because of their gains compared to their grandparents. In truth I know they’re two unrelated trends that happened at the same time, but that’s too subtle for many people I guess.

rather than explicitly condemn the actions outright, offer nothing but qualifications and excuses. — Xtrix

I haven’t done that either.

I have no doubt you believe you’re simply seeking the truth. — Xtrix

I’m not seeking the truth. I’m resisting you.