Huerta lived with the knowledge of her own pain & violation for 60 years. She came forward now because she learned, from the NYT, that she was not the only one. No woman or girl or child or person should ever have to live in such darkness. We must all, always, fight the darkness.
That's not democracy. That's something else. Something that looks like fascism.
If a state kills a citizen of the state, the state doesn't just have duty towards that citizen or their family or community; the state has a duty towards all other citizens. The state must tell us, all of us: here is what happened & why. When the state fails to do that &, instead, spins narratives?
"Oh he had a gun." "Oh she tried to drive away." That's not the way a functional democratic government responds when the state kills a citizen. You don't just reflexively defend the state *against* the citizen. So much else to respond to, here, but we should remember this fact.
YES, of course we should care about the details of what happened. We should care about the truth and accountability. We should also *notice* that the federal Gov't of the United States of America is not, currently, "stopping time" when they themselves have killed citizens.
When the state takes the life of a citizen in a democratic society, time really should stop. We can analyze videos of whether the citizen did something wrong or not; Or if the state had reason to react or not. But no matter *what* we see in those videos, the state needs to take the death seriously.
Some thoughts
We should debate details. That said: When a state kills one of its own citizens, the state then has responsibility. Even if the citizen was "in the wrong," the state still bears the responsibility for truth & accountability. When the state refuses, it's not a democratic state anymore.
Some thoughts
You're a hero too, Will.
They’re heroes
This is fascism.
The federal government just shot another citizen.
The federal government's response is to then *extort* the state of Minnesota to both 1) change its own laws & 2) release its voters' information.
We shot someone --> Now obey or else = fascism.
Think about what it means, as a citizen. Who do you go to for recourse? Your mayor is under investigation. Your governor is under investigation. Your congress person is under investigation. All by your President. You have no one. That's fascism.
Citizens are terrified. Citizens in these "United States" are terrified. It's not partisan. It's general terror. How does the President of the United States respond? He terrorizes all citizens even more. And then he puts the other people who represent the citizens under investigation.
In Minneapolis, St. Paul, Minnesota, we are living in terror. Our mayors & our governor are trying to defend us. The federal government, under the direction of President Trump, is responding to our terror through greater acts of force. They are now threatening the State & Local gov't that defends us
The citizens of a state right now live in terror of the federal government. How does the government respond? By assaulting, through legal system abuse, the representatives of these same citizens. This is fascism.
I want to convey this in no uncertain terms. The citizens of Minnesota--an entire state--are terrified right now. The federal government is responding through greater force. The federal government is not looking at its own citizens as "citizens." They are looking at us as something to "break."
It's happening. Think about society in terms of pillars. From basic civil rights to how the economy is managed. This is how to think of fascism. Maybe you think the threshold was crossed long ago. We can, again, debate about this. It is however inarguable the threshold is crossed now. Fascism.
Trump is initiating a federal vs. state/city showdown in Minnesota. After a federal agent shot a woman. State/local officials who have not complied=now under investigation. MOC's who advised against illegality=under investigation. The Fed, for economic policy=under investigation.
A threshold has been passed. This news re: Walz & Frey needs to be viewed seriously on it own; It also needs to be combined with news about DOJ pressure on the Fed, from Jerome Powell, as well as DOJ investigation into members of Congress who told troops to disobey illegal orders. Fascism.
Own it. They are trying to take our reality, crush it, & reshape it in frames of their own making. Don't let them do it. Give what is happening a label. In this case: Fascism. Tie it together in a conceptual bundle, don't tip-toe, & then use the label to both critique the phenomena & recruit others.
We can argue about where/when/how it started. That will be a valuable historical &, perhaps, civic, argument. What I believe has become inarguable is that we have entered fascism. Early fascism, perhaps. American 21st fascism, yes. Many things to describe. It is, however, unambiguously, fascism.
Some might say, "It's been happening for a while." I agree. I believe it has been. But I think we can also agree that thresholds can be foggy, even in those of us who are looking for where the thresholds exist. That said: there is no longer fogginess. No ambiguity. No argument. It is fascism.
This is unambiguously fascism. It is here. It is happening.
"I can get loud."
In the wake of the Epstein fight, Rep. Adelita Grijalva has become a voice for sexual assault survivors.
"Advocacy for people that feel like they don't have a voice has always been something that I'm very comfortable with. I think that it is our responsibility."
I've said this before but it bears repetition: the consequence of allowing bigotry & other cruelty into your coalition is that everyone starts to stand up for one another a lot less. That's one reason why tolerance of bigotry &/or cruelty is the antithesis of good antifascism.
People are not standing up for each other in the ways they used to. They are many reasons behind this this. That is a historical & socio-cultural discussion to be had. That the outcome is bad for antifascism is, in my view, objectively true.
I believe that the most important factor in successful antifascism is to develop shared truth. That doesn't mean agreement. It means a basic truth about premises. If there are premises you can't agree on, you note them & you set them aside for discussion. You don't let them tear apart "the front."
There are many differences btwn Trump 1.0 & Trump 2.0. One is the willingness of communities to stand up for one another. As well as how competing narratives have robbed us of shared truth. There are organic & inorganic factors underlying all of this. The outcome is bad for anti-fascism, regardless.
I think this is the most important thing. For so many different situations.