SnotFlickerman, (edited )
@SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

the Founding Fathers wanting to break from kings and royal lines

They wanted to keep aristocracy, they just wanted it to be rich men, but not to strictly have a “king.”

They wanted their cake and to eat it, too.

They’re not good people for wanting to take power from the king so they could have it for themselves and keep it from everyone else.

Women’s suffrage and civil rights for minorities were hard fought for in a system that didn’t and still doesn’t want them to have those rights. These things were literally fought for not at the ballot box, but in the fucking streets (black liberation literally took a fucking civil war). Tell me how that jives with “no kings.”

I’m sick as living fuck of these power hungry dickweeds being presented as “good” because “they wanted no kings,” no they just wanted an equally convoluted system that amounts to the same fucking thing, but just for the chosen in-group, because the chosen in-group wrote the fucking founding documents. One king or two hundred kings makes no difference, if the system treats power differently, (and it always has) the system is broken to begin with and treats those with power as though power alone deserves deference. Sounds like the same shit to me, just distributed over a slightly larger group of people.

In other words “That’s just having a King with extra steps.”

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • news@lemmy.world
  • tacticalgear
  • DreamBathrooms
  • InstantRegret
  • magazineikmin
  • khanakhh
  • Youngstown
  • ngwrru68w68
  • slotface
  • everett
  • rosin
  • thenastyranch
  • kavyap
  • GTA5RPClips
  • cisconetworking
  • JUstTest
  • normalnudes
  • osvaldo12
  • ethstaker
  • mdbf
  • modclub
  • Durango
  • tester
  • provamag3
  • cubers
  • Leos
  • anitta
  • megavids
  • lostlight
  • All magazines