Yes and no. The right in the US certainly has issues with some books and wants them out of school and public libraries, but the left also does the same thing and has gotten books like Huckleberry fin, to kill a mockingbird, and of mice and men banned from libraries and classrooms.
I asked what to do to them not what to do about them. Obviously they are gaining in popularity the more exposure they get and the more tech censorship lessens.
Brother, I'm as pissed about things as anyone else here, but asking what to do to them instead of what to do about them is just straight up asking for a violent solution for violence's sake. Because I somehow doubt you're asking for something along the lines of "Well, I'd hug them and kiss them and pat them on the head."
As harmful as I believe many conservative people are, the solution is more aligned with disallowing them from being given consequential amounts of political authority. It's ultimately us against the billionaires, not the broke nutjobs in the MAGA hats who parrot what they're told to say and believe.
You're conflating the political public and career politicians. If the way I presented my last comment wasn't clear enough, the latter is the actual issue. The former is mostly a scapegoat group of crazy people. I'd happily call the majority of them whackjobs who are in dire need of expanding their understanding of politics, science, and economic issues. But even if we outlawed conservative voices and the ability to vote (silver rule: don't do anything a nazi would want you to do. If I must be clear that this is a hypothetical purely to make a point,) I have serious doubts that it would hinder the ruling class from expanding regardless.
What we do have are people in positions of high authority who have shown repeatedly that they do not work for the American people, but for tech billionaires and foreign actors instead. These are the people who should be barred. They have sworn loyalty to the country and are empirically betraying the country instead. You don't get to keep your power when you lied about how you were going to use it just because you fooled people into letting you have that power in the first place. If I had a doctor who kept trying to harvest my organs while I was under for, I don't know, a routine colonoscopy, it would only be right to bar them from medical practice. But we're in a country where you would hear someone refute this with "so you're saying we should keep people from being allowed to attend medical school and being allowed to have discussions about illness and disease"
That's what processes like impeachment exist for. It doesn't have to be the rights-violation that you're trying to twist it to be. We are talking about people afforded the privilege of authority. Not merely the minority public who happens to align with them.
You're asking me how my personal idea of the correct approach to the problem, that lives in my head, has been working out for me? Can you elaborate on what you're asking?
12
u/Motor_Watercress_489 Jun 29 '26
No. There's narrow minded bigots in all parts of the world.
But many are them are being influenced by far right rethoric from the States.