this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2025
840 points (98.2% liked)
Memes
53336 readers
841 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The Case for a Third Reconstruction
Trump is normal for America and how America acts around the world, you guys are just upset it is happening at home now and not Iraq.
I don't really get how that contradicts needing a 3rd reconstruction that dismantles the government agencies that carry out that kind of shit and didn't even exist until WWII rather than dismantling a democracy?
Can't argue with you there, but that's also part of what makes me question who's best interest would be dismantling U.S. democracy instead of dismantling specific agencies within the government, with no plan for where we go next?
Because it kinda seems like those agencies would carry on doing whatever they want even after a union fully dissolves. They would just have fewer obstacles in their way.
When you think about how an American agency, for example, the CIA operates this playbook in other countries, what is their intended goal?
Their goal is to destabilize a country in order to remove any obstacles to taking full control. They usually achieve destabilization by undermining public trust in a system and the leaders of that system, so that the public will either dismantle the government for them or be less resistant once it is dismantled (see the Soviet Union in the late 80s). Once that happens, they already hold all the resources and power, and install somebody they already have lined up.
Considering that there seems to currently be a global campaign to spread disinformation and install far right leaders across the globe, it makes me question if this is happening everywhere bc global destabilization is the goal.
Currently, just about anywhere in the world, who holds the majority of the resources? The people or a small group of oligarchs? When destabilization happens and a local government collapses who has the upper hand when it comes to filling the power vacuum?
What makes you think oligarchs haven't been continuing to undermine and dismantle the second reconstruction this entire time, and aren't using their established global institutions (like banks, corporations, and conservative think tanks) to do exactly what they've been projecting and accusing progressives of doing?
Do you honestly think there isn't a good chance a global cabal of far right conservatives might be ready to use their collective wealth and resources they hoard and pass down for generations to take full global control?
Example: The CIA and the Royal family working together to overthrow a progressive leader in Australia in the 1970s.
Or Steve Kangas on the Origins of the overclass and the crimes of the CIA
What exactly is your point? If they undermined and dismantled the second reconstruction, why wouldn't they the third?
They are attempting to undermine and dismantle it. It took over 50 years of scheming and clawing their way into government to gain enough power to try and tear down from the inside out.
And they will continue to attack and try to dismantle it. That's what enemies and bad actors will always do. That's why the article lays out a strategy for creating a system that allows more flexibility in response to these attacks.
And why would they not do that again?