this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2025
240 points (99.2% liked)

Leopards Ate My Face

7349 readers
686 users here now

Rules:

  1. The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a post/comment removed, please appeal.
  2. Off-topic posts will be removed. If you don't know what "Leopards ate my Face" is, try reading this post.
  3. If the reason your post meets Rule 1 isn't in the source, you must add a source in the post body (not the comments) to explain this.
  4. Posts should use high-quality sources, and posts about an article should have the same headline as that article. You may edit your post if the source changes the headline. For a rough idea, check out this list.
  5. For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the post body.
  6. Reposts within 1 year or the Top 100 of all time are subject to removal.
  7. This is not exclusively a US politics community. You're encouraged to post stories about anyone from any place in the world at any point in history as long as you meet the other rules.
  8. All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.

Also feel free to check out !leopardsatemyface@lemm.ee (also active).

Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

During his brief unemployment, he explored opportunities flying for a private firefighting company – and still would not rule out leaving NOAA. He remains angry that fellow veterans were caught up in the layoffs.

He backed Trump due to the president's commitment to the rule of law, he said, but now Mr Ripp thinks Trump is flouting the correct procedures for reducing the federal workforce.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's a really interesting insight. So in other words, when they say that they're the party of law and order, they literally mean that they want authoritarianism

[–] l_b_i@pawb.social 2 points 4 months ago

authoritarianism is another word that can mean different things to different people. It can be used to mean the government enforcing any rule that isn't liked. civil rights protection? authoritarianism. job protections? authoritarianism. minimum wage? authoritarianism. etc...

Also related is "small government". I think people who use it mean (at least when not in control) "small federal government", the state however should control everything about peoples lives.

I almost think its the laws they support are black and white and unchanging. If something is wrong with a law, it doesn't matter, that's the law. The solution to an issue isn't to change the law, its to enforce it harder, or make it more restrictive. The "rule of law" also applies to individuals and actions. Money crimes, fraud, "the state" are not subject to the same "rule of law" because those laws "don't make sense" and if we look above are a result of "authoritarianism".

Is there a solution to get people to use language that can be agreed upon? who knows, but it would certainly help clear things up. I hate trying to guess what someone thinks a word means to attempt to refute their points.