this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
158 points (93.9% liked)

News

37007 readers
2003 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.place 113 points 2 years ago (7 children)

Hard to say what would have been better.

There's no doubt removing a Hitler from the US elections would benefit everyone.

But given how dangerous his cult is, can you say without a doubt they would stay calm and just accept their leader got killed? And, above all, that the one coming to take his place would be a less fascist person?

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 106 points 2 years ago

OK, but if it did trigger a civil war, it'd be better to do that now than after they hold the government.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 42 points 2 years ago (1 children)

But given how dangerous his cult is, can you say without a doubt they would stay calm and just accept their leader got killed?

His cult will (and already does) do damage if gets in, so it doesn't matter if they might if he doesn't.

And, above all, that the one coming to take his place would be a less fascist person?

The current one already is a fascist person, at that point it doesn't matter if they're more or less, any fascist needs to go.

[–] ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.place 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

There are levels of fascism. A fascist like Trump is dangerous, but given his lack of intelligence, he's less dangerous than a fascist that's smart. You don't want a smart Trump.

Edit: typo

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 18 points 2 years ago

Trump embodies fascism on an instinctive bedrock level. By the time he saw the democracy, he was already a man, and it was nothing to him but stupid.

It’s unlikely that the person that replaces him will be as spiritually aligned with fascism. On the other hand, just like with Hitler, Trump’s pure stupidity and laziness is the one bright spot in what would otherwise be an unbroken landscape of horror that we’re currently driving into.

I think replacing him, atop the machinery that’s been created at this point, with someone who really knew what to do with it and could apply themselves to getting it done, would be probably the worst catastrophe possible out a set of possible futures that doesn’t have any shortage of catastrophes.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You remove Hitler and you get Chancellor Göring. As you suggest, it's just not that simple.

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

There level of martyrdom would be insane

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 21 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They're already delusional and obsessed about their new prophet, what difference would it make.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Most likely they would take significant action. There'd be a lot of terrorism.

Though, probably not much more than if he loses.

[–] Zos_Kia@lemmynsfw.com 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You'd think that but significant action required significant coordination. Coordinating these people without their guru would be like herding cats. Possibly, the leaders and influencers would tear each other apart, leading to mixed messaging, leading to apathy in the ranks.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

ion required significant coordination. Coordinating these people without their guru would be like herding cats. P

You mean like the attempted coup?

Or like the guys that were hitting substations?

Or like the guys driving through peaceful marches?

[–] Zos_Kia@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The attempted coup made sense because they were united under their leader. Even then, while it was shocking, it didn't accomplish any of their immediate goals. Without Trump, my guess is the high level individuals that effectively coordinated it would be too busy fighting each other to accomplish anything significant.

The other examples are individuals committing criminal acts, not significant actions. Maybe you'd see a flare up of those, but probably not that much as crazy individualists get bored quick.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I disagree with "significant action required significant coordination."

One person can take significant action, as we saw in the news the other day.

I'm not agreeing with you and then saying that single people were coordinated; I'm saying that coordination isn't necessary to perform significant acts.

[–] Zos_Kia@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think we're not talking about the same thing. Individual acts of terrorism are not significant in my view, the US gets a bunch of politically motivated shootings every year and it accomplishes absolutely nothing. They are horrible tragedies, but not political drivers.

I'm not Nostradamus but my guess is that if Trump were to suddenly up and die, his movement would fizzle out pretty quickly. His lackeys would fight for power Game of Thrones style, which would fragment the movement and make it essentially toothless. His fans would be agitated for a while, most wouldn't do shit about it, a few would attempt shootings, even fewer would succeed and make headlines for a couple days. But nothing politically significant would happen. Just my $0.02 !

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"Individual acts of terrorism are not significant in my view"

You can go find someone else to 'argue' with.

[–] Zos_Kia@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 2 years ago

Pfff haha. Read the comment again. Slowly. You can do it !

[–] APassenger@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

An organic cause would play out different than an assassin's bullet. Both candidates have the best Healthcare available, so I dunno that organic is likely tho.

[–] ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.place 2 points 2 years ago

Him dying of an illness or simply old age would remove a good portion of the followers ire (not 100% because I'm sure there would be an interesting portion thinking the cause is fake and someone killed him; and of course some nutjob would try to capitalize it). The problem of a potentially worse successor remains.

The solution is by no means simple and, to do it well, you need a long term plan that includes not only defeating him but also a shock plan for anyone trying to copy him until they return to being a moderate right party.

The solution must include too opening the elections to a more complex system with more than 2 parties and actual alternatives that make people able of voting for something that's not just "the lesser evil".