https://www.resetera.com/threads/bidens-approval-has-dropped-50-points-with-young-voters-since-january.528349/post-78843133
This means labor striking, this means disrupting the lives of politicians who aren't serving the needs of their constituents, this means protecting access to basic rights like Abortion with violence.
From the same post:
But people's adherence to legalism, the status quo, and their own dogma prevents them from coming to these conclusions because they've rationalized in their head that all the "rights" we enjoy today were won off the back of civil disobedience and following the rules. Rather than constant agitation against capital and fascist forces.
This is... not true. Especially not of abortion. There was no appreciable fanatical abortion rights movement, on either side, let alone violent ones before
Roe.
Roe spent nearly
three years at the Court before it was decided and all seven sitting justices had decided after the first hearing that they were going to rule for it based on past precedent, it was Nixon's appointees that changed this to the final 7-2 ruling. The ruling at the time was
radical and far ahead of what abortion activists had been seeking in the states, it found a
constitutional right to abortion! The "legalism, the status quo" is what continues to protect that finding today.
Casey established it on firmer legal footing and it's been the law of the land for decades now. I don't even think Dobbs is going to overturn it, merely allow states to narrow the dates it's allowed. And if it doesn't it will be because of that "legalism" called precedent. All of this, plus more, was achieved because feminist leaders like RBG (who they now disavow for not being progressive enough) knew the law and knew how powerful using it was.
Even if
Roe were overturned, rejecting precedent to pursue pure politics like Deepwater wants, it would devolve to the states. States like California and New York aren't going to change a thing. Is he going to setup his militias in hostile Republican states and expect this to work?
Going back to my previous post about how they pretend the 1960's never happened, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965
were won by civil disobedience and otherwise following the rules. The race riots (and Black nationalist revolutionaries like the Black Panthers) came
after 1967 and resulted in no major legislation coming out of Congress (LBJ and Nixon both signed comparatively meaningless bills titled "Civil Rights Act of [Year]" in hopes of quashing the riots, neither worked and almost nobody means them when they mention the Civil Rights Acts) and major crackdowns by the state including police and National Guard straight up mowing down random Black people in cities without penalty.
He also sorta mentions labor rights, and in the United States, almost all of it was achieved through the legal process. The United States did not have mass labor violence like Yurop. Almost every major violent labor uprising was itself violently suppressed and achieved nothing in regards to rights. The "rights" were achieved later through entirely legal means.
This is actually his more damning quote considering his later post where he denies actually calling for anything like violence:
People need to get serious about what its going to take to defend their communities from fascism, and quit thinking that this country lives in some post-modern fantasy where power changes hands peacefully.
This is, in the context of his post, an explicit call to violence to achieve "anti-capitalist" ends. He's not talking about Democratic to Republican/Trump to Biden/etc. and vice versa he's blatantly talking about violently eliminating the entire "capitalist" system and violently suppressing anyone who attempts to bring it back.
