Would ISFJ be better then for you? I get INFJ for the most part but a few times I have gotten ISFJ as well. That's the only one that changes.
No that was an awesome speech that needed to be made for a long time. If he said Justice Democrats (not liberal) then he would probably be correct. Justice Democrats and MAGA Republicans have the same goals, to dismantle democracy and replace it with an authoritarian government.
You got trouble, folks Right here in River City, trouble with a capital "T" And that rhymes with "P" and that stands for pool
MAGA Republican does not mean those things to most Republicans and acting like it does is absurd and dangerous.
You can't give a speech aimed at appeasing fascists. If Biden had tried, he would have been labeled soft. Fascists only understand strength. They are bullies, and as we see in this thread, call out a bully and they get triggered and whine like little babies. Difficult decision, but I agree with Biden it's time to stop trying to appease the MAGA crowd. They have no desire to compromise and be inclusive. They don't want to lead; they want to rule. The only way to combat this is head on. If that annoys some people, so be it. Can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs. And while I know it will fall mainly on deaf ears, if you are one of the people triggered last night, just look at whom you are defending. From Trump's racism against Mexicans from the start of his candidacy, to abusing the office of POTUS by illegally withholding Ukraine funding in exchange for dirt on Biden, to keeping TS/SCI docs illegally in his desk draw, these things are indefensible. So why should Biden even try and appease you?
Could you please define fascism for me not using the words "Republican" or "Trump" or "January 4th" or "MAGA". It's not to argue with you, I just want to have a baseline for your understanding of what the term means.
The distinctions can be understood if they want to be understood. If they don't, there is no amount of distinction that will be sufficient
Our republic is threatened by domestic terrorists and semi-fascists. Why not call out the elephant in the room. We need to grow the slim majority opposing fascism, until it is rooted out.
Whatever the heck those pictures are, and I never said it was modified. I've no idea what you were trying to convey.
It is an interesting question. One good proxy for it might be support for January 6. As of January this year, that number was about 24% of Republicans. What is really interesting, and this is the real challenge, is that there was another question as part of the same poll asking people to describe what happened at the Capitol that day (multiple responses were possible to this question). 47% of Republicans described it as "patriotism" and 56% of Republicans defined it as "defending freedom." What is interesting about that is that while only about 24% of Republicans appear to actively support political violence (at least that instance of it), there is another significant group of Republicans that seem to support those that do support the violence, while not directly doing it themselves. What is also interesting is that 41% of Republicans said that the people who forced their way into the Capitol were "left-leaning groups." That is the other major challenge here: dealing with the cognitive dissonance of people who don't support political violence but who want to support the aims of those committing political violence. CBS News poll: A year after Jan. 6, violence still seen threatening U.S. democracy, and some say force can be justified
Fascist is someone who believes they are entitled to rule because of their superiority. Far right is often pure democracy, which is always majority rules. But our Constitutional Democracy is different, because while we have majority rule, we also have Constitutional minority rights. This is what made de Toqueville call us the great experiment, and potential beacon shining on the hill. Fascists are nationalists, and believe they and their ideas are superior to everything else. By definition, all people who are against them are inferior. Nationalist have often used race in the past as a defining marker, because skin color is an easy way to distinguish between who is superior and who is inferior. But fascism doesn't necessarily rely on race as the distinguishing marker. The difference could be internal, such as political persuasion, and not something external, like skin color. Fascists are often flabbergasted when they lose votes and power. They believe in their superiority so much that they simply do not understand when the majority actually disagrees with them! When fascists do lose, they often cry foul or fraud, because it's the only way they can reconcile their loss. When fascists do gain power, they often work to ensure they maintain said power by taking away the rights and voice of the minorities. It's why in fascists countries, it never ends well for the minority population. They are targeted on purpose, and forced to either submit to the majority, or face dire consequences. Never more obvious than in WW II Germany and all undesirable populations, including Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, etc. Good enough for you? Now, if you want me to explain how Trump and his sycophants fit this profile, that's easy. And there are plenty of Conservatives that don't. For example, Romney and L. Cheney have right wing ideas that I don't necessarily agree with, but they respect the Constitution, and the rights of the minority. And for this, they have been labeled RINOs! Because to the fascist, if you aren't in lockstep with them, you are against them.
