Excellent article! I sadly came to the same conclusion myself. I have spent over 2 years researching what makes the extreme right tick.This is NOT my field of study.. I am an artist. After watching the behaviors of what I thought were decent people during Covid!!... realizing believing in science is optional for far too many!!... coming across the Alex Jones documentary!!... anyone not despising Putin!!?!.. I had to come out of my small creative world because I was so startled, without words, frustrated, sad... I came armed with compassion. I worked hard to communicate with conservative people before the election. I listened. I spent too many nights curled up trying to escape for awhile. On those nights I thought one too many times, "too many of these people vote". Now this has become a part time calling. I am involved. Your conclusion... makes perfect sense... in reaction to how much we can see every day.... thanks to technology. I say this with an extremely heavy heart.
Yeah... it took me some time to really get it as well... You might want to check out my Unmasking MAGA series. I wrote it as my own way to deconstruct and understand how we came to be where we are today.
However, and it's a big however. The "sorting", the determination of "guilt" (to some degree or another) is essential. Otherwise, there can be a tendency toward "collective punishment", which most of us see as immoral.
You made the best argument against the death penalty right up front. It cannot be undone. It is final. Yet we humans are doomed to employ it incorrectly on occasion.
I've never come down on either side of the death penalty. But I think the best argument for it is Ted Bundy. First of all, serial killers cannot be rehabilitated--it's an uncurable addiction, so we need to thoroughly secure them away from society. But Ted was not only a consummate serial killer, he demonstrated more than once that he was a consummate escape artist. And when (not if) he escaped, he would absolutely kill again. What to do with someone like that? Lobotomy? I doubt it--he was also a very competent user of the legal system & would be able to tie that up in court for years...giving him years to plan his next escape.
This has been hands down the hardest article for me to write. I think it reflects Popper's paradox within the context of our current reality. While I had previously considered the paradox in the abstract, looking at it from a tangible perspective was a difficult exercise. All things considered though, I'm finding it difficult to come to a different conclusion, especially when considering the apparent cyclical nature of what we're dealing with today.
You mentioned that the Nazis exterminated more people. But, consider this, it took the Nazis months, in some cases years to build the concentration/ extermination camps, WE DID IT IN 8 days. Also, the Nazis attempted deportation too, but it was SLOW. Stephen Miller is the architect of both Trump administrations' immigration policies. He has increased the quota from 1,000 to 3,000 already and it's only been a matter of some weeks. He is impatient, arrogant and, cruel. And PSYCHONAZI has given him free rein so far. Plus he is making a great deal of money for himself. But, if he finds a way to make money with their deaths ?
He may decide America should just kill them from the start.
This vividly explains one of the points I was trying to explain in the article: a lot of people get hung up on the body count when making comparisons to Nazi Germany, and I think that's a mistake. Instead, we ought to look at the moral depravity underlying the actions of both sides. And when I look at what they're doing now with ICE, despite it not being a direct attempt to kill people, the openness with which they're carrying out the cruelty (compared with how the Nazis tried to do it in the shadows) where we see the masked, unidentifiable agents all over the media, the disappearing people to CECOT without even trying to pretend there was due process or proof of criminality, the way they're “marketing” the cruelty to the point people feel comfortable talking about feeding 65 million people to alligators or selling merch, and as you say, the efficiency with which they're undertaking this cruelty… taken together I see a level of moral depravity and cruelty that, in my opinion, matches if not exceeds that of the Nazis. The differences between people being killed or otherwise disappeared or having their lives destroyed is but a matter of means and opportunity. If Miller can devise a means and opportunity to execute his cruelty more efficiently by killing people while still being able to get away with it, I strongly doubt he'd hesitate.
I don't understand the reasoning in this article. Supporting the death penalty means endorsing a policy that would be used by the very people you are reviling here. When evil convinces us to change our moral standards, to give up ideals of justice and mercy, then that evil has won. I hope you'll reconsider.
This is precisely the argument I've been struggling with. However, how is it any more moral to preserve and allow such evil to continue unabated? What did we gain from allowing the evil of Slavery to become the evil of the KKK and that to become the evil of Jim Crow, which we have preserved into the evil that manifests today? And if the two options are to be evil by enabling it for eternity or evil by eliminating it once and for all, then how is the former not worse than the latter?
I appreciate and feel for the struggle you're having ... In my view, the problem is that killing evil will not eliminate it. Only transforming evil will vanquish it... You know the myth of the Lernaean Hydra? As each of the hydra's heads is destroyed, two. more pop up? Yes, we want to overcome evil, vanquish it and the suffering it causes. We need to find another way. The New Testament advises to "overcome evil with good." Romans 12:12 ... So how do we do that?
Here’s the problem I see with this as I was having my own internal struggle…
We have, as far as I can tell from history, attempted to “transform” this kind of evil in every way imaginable. We tried reconciliation after the Civil War; we tried education and conversation since the Civil Rights movement. Not only has every attempt failed, but the evil has each time returned worse than the last time. I believed, incorrectly, that we had overcome this evil after Jim Crow. I was terribly mistaken. That evil is as present and strong as it has ever been since the Civil War. Every attempt to “transform” that evil has done precisely nothing, no progress, based on what I see today. So it seems clear to me, that “transforming” this kind of evil — which I consider quite different from what drives “personal” crimes of despair or passion — is a fool’s errand that does nothing but perpetuate the evil, making us complicit to its destruction by our refusal to put an end to it.
As for citing the bible and as someone who was raised catholic — though I am no longer — and read the bible from cover-to-cover multiple times, it’s very easy to find passages that can justify just about anything you want. In this case, I would suggest Matthew 25:40-45 + Revelation 2:26-27 to counter Romans 12:12:
Matthew 25:
“40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’”
Revelation 2
“26 To the one who is victorious and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations— 27 that one ‘will rule them with an iron scepter and will dash them to pieces like pottery as I have received authority from my Father.”
Combined, the two passages would suggest that Jesus is damning those who mistreat the hungry, the stranger and the poor to the eternal fire of hell — something that he virtually never does, strongly signifying this is one of his most important commands/wills. And then on Revelation, it is prophesied that to the one that followed god’s will to the end, which as demonstrated in Matthew 25, one of the strongest wills is to care for the hungry, the stranger and the poor, it will be given the command to rule against those who didn’t with an iron scepter, and to dash them to pieces like pottery.
So, not only does Jesus damn people like ICE who seek to destroy the stranger to the eternal fire of hell, so does revelation suggest that they ought to be dashed to pieces like pottery by those who follow the will of God.
Am I suggesting that I take any direction from the bible? Not even a little. Because again, one can get the bible to justify just about anything: from mercy to genocide, from benevolence to slavery.
This is exactly why I don't look to the Bible (or any ancient text) as a moral guidebook for these decisions. The text can be twisted endlessly. Ultimately, if we are to act morally today, we have to ground our decisions in reality, in history, and in a clear-eyed view of human nature.
You write eloquently, and let me say that I'm not a strict adherent to Biblical texts; though raised in a Christian household, my spiritual practice is informed by, tho not restricted to those teachings. One point in all the texts you cite though is the admonition: Vengeance is mine says the Lord. (In other words, don't take matters into your own hands.)
-- Also, Jim Crow has never gone away. It's persisted throughout this country despite Civil Rights advances... if anything the Trump regime has given freedom/license to those hateful tendencies that have simmered throughout our history and now seem to be blooming everywhere. So how do we respond in the face of evil? Especially when bringing back the death penalty puts that option in the hands of those engaged in the most vile and evil of acts? How do we resist evil? I don't have the answer. I just doubt very much that being in favor of the death penalty will solve the problem. I am saying that like Hercules and the Lernaean Hydra, we must vanquish it in the most effective way.
I didn't think we had completely defeated the underlying racism of Jim Crow. I even write about it extensively in the very first chapter of Unmasking MAGA and throughout at different points. However, I did think we had defeated its ability to be so pervasive and overt, that there's no way they'd be able to manifest as state sponsored violence the way they did back then, much less at the federal level as they're doing now. They're literally the most powerful they have ever been. Remember, even during the Civil War they were unable to fully gain federal power, and throughout all of Reconstruction and Jim Crow their power was mostly limited to the South and at the federal level the most power they achieved was indirect, systemic violence in the form of redlining, immigration quotas and looking the other way when it came to state violence.
As for the power of the death penalty falling on the wrong hands... If they want that power, they will simply take it anyway, independent of what we do. This is the same failed argument that has led Dems in the house and senate not to change rules to our advantage because otherwise Repubs might use it to their advantage, just for Repubs to turn around and do it anyway, such that we're the only ones who get screwed.
I've come to the conclusion that any power, be it pardon, the death penalty, taxation, etc., that none of it is inherently good or evil. Rather, it's the outcome that the power is used to bring about that is good or evil, and whether given the opportunity people choose to use the power they have for good or for evil and finally, and very importantly, whether people choose to abdicate the power they have, to the benefit of good or evil outcomes. And I think it's this utilization of power that ultimately got us to where we are now. For the last 50 years or so, Republicans have sought all kinds of power in order to use it for evil purposes. And in many ways, they have succeeded, with this most recent budget bill being a perfect example. On the other hand, for the last 50 Dems have mostly abdicated their power, which came from the New Deal mandate to be the party of the working people, to the benefit of Republicans' desired outcomes. And it's precisely because this abdication feels so much like actual betrayal, which is the worst emotion that humans are capable of feeling, that Republicans have been able to take a massive chunk of the working class base over the last 50 years, even if they are the source of much of the pain being experienced in the country today. Because for all their evils, however aparent, at least they never "betrayed" them in the way that Dems have. And this isn't even something I'm concluding based on analysis, this is something I've heard from former Dems in their 50s and 60s who now are Trump supporters.
So, to go back to the subject, I think that if we don't choose to use the death penalty to put a permanent end to some of the top architects of the wave of moral rot we're experiencing today from fear that such power might fall in the wrong hands, that the very people you're suggesting we should spare will be the exact same people who will ultimately use the death penalty power anyways to wrought even more suffering regardless of whether we used the death penalty or not. And then, when that comes to pass, we will have been just as complicit in the carnage they will bring about because we will have enabled it as a result of our failure to act decisively.
Here's an analogy that while silly, perfectly illustrates what I'm saying. Every time Batman encounters the Joker, he often has the opportunity to kill the Joker. And yet he never does. In turn, after each encounter that he's spared, the Joker goes on to kill numerous innocent people. Don't you think that at some point, after this pattern is well established, that Batman is complicit on the Joker's carnage; on the pain, suffering and death that Batman enables just so that he can fulfill this inner desire to keep his hands "clean"? Is there not a point, in which preserving the Joker's life is a graver evil than taking his life?
Think about it another way. There is a temptation when our passion is aroused by injustice, evil, and reprehensible darkness like which surrounds us now to seek vengeance and payback in kind, to succumb to the dark side. That is something we must resist. We must be careful here. Yes we can and should resist the “evil empire” but we must do it with integrity, honor, intelligence and effectiveness.
Absolutely illegal, but whose actually upholding our rights & laws. The Supreme Court should be held accountable, this WH administration & every person hiding behind “it was just orders “
Democrat policy regarding labor has not altered one iota of a degree since the Civil War. They have shown who they are; now it is time to believe them.
I read your article, and it’s an almost perfect distillation of right-wing revisionist history—full of rhetorical flair, but not much in the way of evidence or logic.
Let’s set the record straight, since this “Democrats are the real racists” line is the oldest propaganda trick in the book:
1. Parties Swapped. That’s a Fact, Not an Opinion.
The Democratic Party of the Confederacy and Jim Crow was the party of the Deep South. After the New Deal and especially after LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act, those “old Democrats” fled to the Republican Party, which built its modern coalition on their resentments—the so-called “Southern Strategy.”
The parties literally swapped. Today, the GOP owns the Deep South, rural America, and the politics of racial grievance. Democrats are the party of cities, the North, and the very people the old Confederacy sought to oppress.
If you doubt it, look at a single electoral map or the voting records of Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, or the entire “Dixiecrat” movement—every single one of them ended their careers as Republicans.
2. Who Actually Profits From Undocumented Labor?
The industries that exploit undocumented labor—agriculture, meatpacking, hospitality, construction—donate overwhelmingly to Republicans. That’s public record.
It’s Republican agribusiness and construction magnates lobbying to keep wages low, block citizenship, and maintain a cheap, terrified labor force. The “Democrats just want cheap labor” line is projection at its most brazen.
The only policy consistently blocked by the GOP for 40 years? A path to citizenship that would eliminate that exploitation—because then, workers could actually bargain for wages.
3. Today’s Republican Party Is the Party of Pre-Civil Rights Democrats.
The social base, the geography, the policies, the resentments—it all matches. The only thing that changed was the name on the door.
You say “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree”? You’re right—but you’re pointing at the wrong tree. The roots of the current GOP are in the Confederate South, Jim Crow, and the anti-civil rights backlash.
4. On “Law and Order” and ICE:
The real story of “law and order” is a regime of terror aimed at the powerless and a total pass for the powerful. You want to talk about ICE? Let’s talk about the GOP's record of shielding employers while jailing workers and tearing families apart.
If Republicans truly cared about “the law,” they’d go after the employers who hire undocumented workers. But those employers are Republican donors. Instead, they scapegoat kids in the fields while giving the bosses a free pass.
5. The “Democrats Haven’t Changed” Lie is Just That—a Lie.
FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ, MLK, the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act, Barack Obama—these are not the party of Andrew Jackson or Jefferson Davis.
Pretending nothing changed is an insult to the millions who fought, bled, and died to change this country for the better.
So, spare me the fake history. The only people still falling for this “Democrats = Confederates” nonsense are those who never bothered to pick up a history book written after 1964.
Here’s the truth, repeated as many times as it takes:
Today’s Republican Party is the direct heir to the Confederacy and Jim Crow.
Today’s Democratic Party is the party of civil rights, the New Deal, and the multi-racial working class.
The record, the maps, the votes, and the donor lists all say the same thing.
If you want to keep running this tired old play, you’re welcome to. But the rest of us are done letting you get away with rewriting history to cover for the people actually running the biggest exploitation racket in modern America.
Excellent article! I sadly came to the same conclusion myself. I have spent over 2 years researching what makes the extreme right tick.This is NOT my field of study.. I am an artist. After watching the behaviors of what I thought were decent people during Covid!!... realizing believing in science is optional for far too many!!... coming across the Alex Jones documentary!!... anyone not despising Putin!!?!.. I had to come out of my small creative world because I was so startled, without words, frustrated, sad... I came armed with compassion. I worked hard to communicate with conservative people before the election. I listened. I spent too many nights curled up trying to escape for awhile. On those nights I thought one too many times, "too many of these people vote". Now this has become a part time calling. I am involved. Your conclusion... makes perfect sense... in reaction to how much we can see every day.... thanks to technology. I say this with an extremely heavy heart.
Yeah... it took me some time to really get it as well... You might want to check out my Unmasking MAGA series. I wrote it as my own way to deconstruct and understand how we came to be where we are today.
https://americanmanifesto.news/p/unmasking-maga
Broadly concur.
However, and it's a big however. The "sorting", the determination of "guilt" (to some degree or another) is essential. Otherwise, there can be a tendency toward "collective punishment", which most of us see as immoral.
You made the best argument against the death penalty right up front. It cannot be undone. It is final. Yet we humans are doomed to employ it incorrectly on occasion.
The defense rests, your honor.
Wow. This is intense.
I've never come down on either side of the death penalty. But I think the best argument for it is Ted Bundy. First of all, serial killers cannot be rehabilitated--it's an uncurable addiction, so we need to thoroughly secure them away from society. But Ted was not only a consummate serial killer, he demonstrated more than once that he was a consummate escape artist. And when (not if) he escaped, he would absolutely kill again. What to do with someone like that? Lobotomy? I doubt it--he was also a very competent user of the legal system & would be able to tie that up in court for years...giving him years to plan his next escape.
It's a tough nut, mi amigo.
This has been hands down the hardest article for me to write. I think it reflects Popper's paradox within the context of our current reality. While I had previously considered the paradox in the abstract, looking at it from a tangible perspective was a difficult exercise. All things considered though, I'm finding it difficult to come to a different conclusion, especially when considering the apparent cyclical nature of what we're dealing with today.
Yeah, I can tell. It's a real dilemma.
You mentioned that the Nazis exterminated more people. But, consider this, it took the Nazis months, in some cases years to build the concentration/ extermination camps, WE DID IT IN 8 days. Also, the Nazis attempted deportation too, but it was SLOW. Stephen Miller is the architect of both Trump administrations' immigration policies. He has increased the quota from 1,000 to 3,000 already and it's only been a matter of some weeks. He is impatient, arrogant and, cruel. And PSYCHONAZI has given him free rein so far. Plus he is making a great deal of money for himself. But, if he finds a way to make money with their deaths ?
He may decide America should just kill them from the start.
May God help us all
This vividly explains one of the points I was trying to explain in the article: a lot of people get hung up on the body count when making comparisons to Nazi Germany, and I think that's a mistake. Instead, we ought to look at the moral depravity underlying the actions of both sides. And when I look at what they're doing now with ICE, despite it not being a direct attempt to kill people, the openness with which they're carrying out the cruelty (compared with how the Nazis tried to do it in the shadows) where we see the masked, unidentifiable agents all over the media, the disappearing people to CECOT without even trying to pretend there was due process or proof of criminality, the way they're “marketing” the cruelty to the point people feel comfortable talking about feeding 65 million people to alligators or selling merch, and as you say, the efficiency with which they're undertaking this cruelty… taken together I see a level of moral depravity and cruelty that, in my opinion, matches if not exceeds that of the Nazis. The differences between people being killed or otherwise disappeared or having their lives destroyed is but a matter of means and opportunity. If Miller can devise a means and opportunity to execute his cruelty more efficiently by killing people while still being able to get away with it, I strongly doubt he'd hesitate.
I agree, I think the cruelty and chaos is on purpose to titillate the likes of Miller and Trump.
I don't understand the reasoning in this article. Supporting the death penalty means endorsing a policy that would be used by the very people you are reviling here. When evil convinces us to change our moral standards, to give up ideals of justice and mercy, then that evil has won. I hope you'll reconsider.
This is precisely the argument I've been struggling with. However, how is it any more moral to preserve and allow such evil to continue unabated? What did we gain from allowing the evil of Slavery to become the evil of the KKK and that to become the evil of Jim Crow, which we have preserved into the evil that manifests today? And if the two options are to be evil by enabling it for eternity or evil by eliminating it once and for all, then how is the former not worse than the latter?
I appreciate and feel for the struggle you're having ... In my view, the problem is that killing evil will not eliminate it. Only transforming evil will vanquish it... You know the myth of the Lernaean Hydra? As each of the hydra's heads is destroyed, two. more pop up? Yes, we want to overcome evil, vanquish it and the suffering it causes. We need to find another way. The New Testament advises to "overcome evil with good." Romans 12:12 ... So how do we do that?
Here’s the problem I see with this as I was having my own internal struggle…
We have, as far as I can tell from history, attempted to “transform” this kind of evil in every way imaginable. We tried reconciliation after the Civil War; we tried education and conversation since the Civil Rights movement. Not only has every attempt failed, but the evil has each time returned worse than the last time. I believed, incorrectly, that we had overcome this evil after Jim Crow. I was terribly mistaken. That evil is as present and strong as it has ever been since the Civil War. Every attempt to “transform” that evil has done precisely nothing, no progress, based on what I see today. So it seems clear to me, that “transforming” this kind of evil — which I consider quite different from what drives “personal” crimes of despair or passion — is a fool’s errand that does nothing but perpetuate the evil, making us complicit to its destruction by our refusal to put an end to it.
As for citing the bible and as someone who was raised catholic — though I am no longer — and read the bible from cover-to-cover multiple times, it’s very easy to find passages that can justify just about anything you want. In this case, I would suggest Matthew 25:40-45 + Revelation 2:26-27 to counter Romans 12:12:
Matthew 25:
“40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’”
Revelation 2
“26 To the one who is victorious and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations— 27 that one ‘will rule them with an iron scepter and will dash them to pieces like pottery as I have received authority from my Father.”
Combined, the two passages would suggest that Jesus is damning those who mistreat the hungry, the stranger and the poor to the eternal fire of hell — something that he virtually never does, strongly signifying this is one of his most important commands/wills. And then on Revelation, it is prophesied that to the one that followed god’s will to the end, which as demonstrated in Matthew 25, one of the strongest wills is to care for the hungry, the stranger and the poor, it will be given the command to rule against those who didn’t with an iron scepter, and to dash them to pieces like pottery.
So, not only does Jesus damn people like ICE who seek to destroy the stranger to the eternal fire of hell, so does revelation suggest that they ought to be dashed to pieces like pottery by those who follow the will of God.
Am I suggesting that I take any direction from the bible? Not even a little. Because again, one can get the bible to justify just about anything: from mercy to genocide, from benevolence to slavery.
This is exactly why I don't look to the Bible (or any ancient text) as a moral guidebook for these decisions. The text can be twisted endlessly. Ultimately, if we are to act morally today, we have to ground our decisions in reality, in history, and in a clear-eyed view of human nature.
You write eloquently, and let me say that I'm not a strict adherent to Biblical texts; though raised in a Christian household, my spiritual practice is informed by, tho not restricted to those teachings. One point in all the texts you cite though is the admonition: Vengeance is mine says the Lord. (In other words, don't take matters into your own hands.)
-- Also, Jim Crow has never gone away. It's persisted throughout this country despite Civil Rights advances... if anything the Trump regime has given freedom/license to those hateful tendencies that have simmered throughout our history and now seem to be blooming everywhere. So how do we respond in the face of evil? Especially when bringing back the death penalty puts that option in the hands of those engaged in the most vile and evil of acts? How do we resist evil? I don't have the answer. I just doubt very much that being in favor of the death penalty will solve the problem. I am saying that like Hercules and the Lernaean Hydra, we must vanquish it in the most effective way.
I didn't think we had completely defeated the underlying racism of Jim Crow. I even write about it extensively in the very first chapter of Unmasking MAGA and throughout at different points. However, I did think we had defeated its ability to be so pervasive and overt, that there's no way they'd be able to manifest as state sponsored violence the way they did back then, much less at the federal level as they're doing now. They're literally the most powerful they have ever been. Remember, even during the Civil War they were unable to fully gain federal power, and throughout all of Reconstruction and Jim Crow their power was mostly limited to the South and at the federal level the most power they achieved was indirect, systemic violence in the form of redlining, immigration quotas and looking the other way when it came to state violence.
As for the power of the death penalty falling on the wrong hands... If they want that power, they will simply take it anyway, independent of what we do. This is the same failed argument that has led Dems in the house and senate not to change rules to our advantage because otherwise Repubs might use it to their advantage, just for Repubs to turn around and do it anyway, such that we're the only ones who get screwed.
I've come to the conclusion that any power, be it pardon, the death penalty, taxation, etc., that none of it is inherently good or evil. Rather, it's the outcome that the power is used to bring about that is good or evil, and whether given the opportunity people choose to use the power they have for good or for evil and finally, and very importantly, whether people choose to abdicate the power they have, to the benefit of good or evil outcomes. And I think it's this utilization of power that ultimately got us to where we are now. For the last 50 years or so, Republicans have sought all kinds of power in order to use it for evil purposes. And in many ways, they have succeeded, with this most recent budget bill being a perfect example. On the other hand, for the last 50 Dems have mostly abdicated their power, which came from the New Deal mandate to be the party of the working people, to the benefit of Republicans' desired outcomes. And it's precisely because this abdication feels so much like actual betrayal, which is the worst emotion that humans are capable of feeling, that Republicans have been able to take a massive chunk of the working class base over the last 50 years, even if they are the source of much of the pain being experienced in the country today. Because for all their evils, however aparent, at least they never "betrayed" them in the way that Dems have. And this isn't even something I'm concluding based on analysis, this is something I've heard from former Dems in their 50s and 60s who now are Trump supporters.
So, to go back to the subject, I think that if we don't choose to use the death penalty to put a permanent end to some of the top architects of the wave of moral rot we're experiencing today from fear that such power might fall in the wrong hands, that the very people you're suggesting we should spare will be the exact same people who will ultimately use the death penalty power anyways to wrought even more suffering regardless of whether we used the death penalty or not. And then, when that comes to pass, we will have been just as complicit in the carnage they will bring about because we will have enabled it as a result of our failure to act decisively.
Here's an analogy that while silly, perfectly illustrates what I'm saying. Every time Batman encounters the Joker, he often has the opportunity to kill the Joker. And yet he never does. In turn, after each encounter that he's spared, the Joker goes on to kill numerous innocent people. Don't you think that at some point, after this pattern is well established, that Batman is complicit on the Joker's carnage; on the pain, suffering and death that Batman enables just so that he can fulfill this inner desire to keep his hands "clean"? Is there not a point, in which preserving the Joker's life is a graver evil than taking his life?
Think about it another way. There is a temptation when our passion is aroused by injustice, evil, and reprehensible darkness like which surrounds us now to seek vengeance and payback in kind, to succumb to the dark side. That is something we must resist. We must be careful here. Yes we can and should resist the “evil empire” but we must do it with integrity, honor, intelligence and effectiveness.
Absolutely illegal, but whose actually upholding our rights & laws. The Supreme Court should be held accountable, this WH administration & every person hiding behind “it was just orders “
Democrat policy regarding labor has not altered one iota of a degree since the Civil War. They have shown who they are; now it is time to believe them.
https://torrancestephensphd.substack.com/p/apple-dont-fall-far-from-the-tree
I read your article, and it’s an almost perfect distillation of right-wing revisionist history—full of rhetorical flair, but not much in the way of evidence or logic.
Let’s set the record straight, since this “Democrats are the real racists” line is the oldest propaganda trick in the book:
1. Parties Swapped. That’s a Fact, Not an Opinion.
The Democratic Party of the Confederacy and Jim Crow was the party of the Deep South. After the New Deal and especially after LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act, those “old Democrats” fled to the Republican Party, which built its modern coalition on their resentments—the so-called “Southern Strategy.”
The parties literally swapped. Today, the GOP owns the Deep South, rural America, and the politics of racial grievance. Democrats are the party of cities, the North, and the very people the old Confederacy sought to oppress.
If you doubt it, look at a single electoral map or the voting records of Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, or the entire “Dixiecrat” movement—every single one of them ended their careers as Republicans.
2. Who Actually Profits From Undocumented Labor?
The industries that exploit undocumented labor—agriculture, meatpacking, hospitality, construction—donate overwhelmingly to Republicans. That’s public record.
It’s Republican agribusiness and construction magnates lobbying to keep wages low, block citizenship, and maintain a cheap, terrified labor force. The “Democrats just want cheap labor” line is projection at its most brazen.
The only policy consistently blocked by the GOP for 40 years? A path to citizenship that would eliminate that exploitation—because then, workers could actually bargain for wages.
3. Today’s Republican Party Is the Party of Pre-Civil Rights Democrats.
The social base, the geography, the policies, the resentments—it all matches. The only thing that changed was the name on the door.
You say “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree”? You’re right—but you’re pointing at the wrong tree. The roots of the current GOP are in the Confederate South, Jim Crow, and the anti-civil rights backlash.
4. On “Law and Order” and ICE:
The real story of “law and order” is a regime of terror aimed at the powerless and a total pass for the powerful. You want to talk about ICE? Let’s talk about the GOP's record of shielding employers while jailing workers and tearing families apart.
If Republicans truly cared about “the law,” they’d go after the employers who hire undocumented workers. But those employers are Republican donors. Instead, they scapegoat kids in the fields while giving the bosses a free pass.
5. The “Democrats Haven’t Changed” Lie is Just That—a Lie.
FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ, MLK, the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act, Barack Obama—these are not the party of Andrew Jackson or Jefferson Davis.
Pretending nothing changed is an insult to the millions who fought, bled, and died to change this country for the better.
So, spare me the fake history. The only people still falling for this “Democrats = Confederates” nonsense are those who never bothered to pick up a history book written after 1964.
Here’s the truth, repeated as many times as it takes:
Today’s Republican Party is the direct heir to the Confederacy and Jim Crow.
Today’s Democratic Party is the party of civil rights, the New Deal, and the multi-racial working class.
The record, the maps, the votes, and the donor lists all say the same thing.
If you want to keep running this tired old play, you’re welcome to. But the rest of us are done letting you get away with rewriting history to cover for the people actually running the biggest exploitation racket in modern America.