But, to the point of force, right down to the "and then they would arrest you" can someone explain *why* the name came down? Why doesn't Trump just ignore the court?

The court orders the name must come down. Great. Very funny.

But why listen. Why don't we get "oh OK I'll take it down" but then nothing happens?

How does the power flow?

That seems a little important to me maybe.

2/2

@futurebird I agree that this is an important question - because yes, if he could just do his usual "fuck you, try to stop me!" thing, he would have, which implies that he doesn't have the power to resist this court order.

- whic obviously begs the question: Where *does* his actual power end? Since lawsuits etc. keep stopping his initiatives, he's certainly not as powerful as he thinks & opposition should be delineating those borders & then hammering on them.

@jwcph

A lot of people are despondent. Saying things like "he will cancel the election"

How exactly? Will he put a gun to Gov. Hochul of NY's head? (and at least 20 other governors?)

"he will do marshal law"

They tried that in MN. They don't have the man power to do it nationwide. They don't even have enough to take NYC, that's why ICE has not cracked down here like in MN.

Middle class people throwing fits works.

@jwcph

I don't like it when people are despondent and defeated since that's the ONLY way that these clowns win in the long term. If we just give up and believe that an election could be canceled. Or stay in our houses if ICE shows up and tries to shut down every street.

MN saved us all really. It's an illustration of the limits.

@futurebird @jwcph

I forget who keeps pointing this out--Thom Hartmann? Paul Krugman? Whoever, it's true that a stolen election needs to be plausible. Bush2 could only steal his election because it was actually close (after millions of people were disenfranchised in the red states, of course). This one won't be close by any measure. Flagrantly stealing it might be enough to rouse the white middle class from its privileged slumber.

@Uair @jwcph

I've been putting up signs in the park that say "Pollinator Sanctuary Do Not Mow" in a small ragged area of my mostly ignored inner city park. It's working. If there are a lot of people who really love the idea of the wildflowers being mowed someone might find out that the signs aren't real. But I can do it because I care the most about this issue, (and I want to think because I'm right about it being better for the park.)

This is how a lot of power works.

@futurebird

Yup. You can only make people do something if you go through the hassle of actually making them. It's the weakness of all totalitarian systems. They end up devoting all their energy on internal control and collapse against the pressure of the outside world.

Free states always defeat slave states.

@clayfoot @housepanther @Uair

There is an ongoing debate in myrmecology (ant science) about if it's "problematic" to call what some social parasite species of ants do "slavery."

These ants will raid the nests of other species and take their pupae and youngest workers. These workers end up feeding and caring for the eggs of the slaver ants.

Slavery is such a horrible institution that some people have wondered if it's insensitive to use that word for what the ants do.

1/

@clayfoot @housepanther @Uair

They worry that it makes it seem like "slavery is natural" and some racists have even admired Polyergus ants who are unable to feed themselves since their survival is so dependent on stealing the brood of other colonies.

I personally think it's fine to call it "slavery." To me it shows that like other forms of predation and parasitism slavery isn't driven by ideology. It's about free stuff. It's about the path of least work and resistance.

2/