Unlike before people don’t have to meet but can organize online. If everybody stays home, there is no threat from the police.
The problem is that to do anything of consequence, those people need to leave their homes and take action. And they’d rather juat sit at home and continue “organizing” online…
No, they don’t have to leave for consequences. If they don’t leave and don’t go to work, civilization will stop and Trump cannot continue. Then if there is a joined demand for a new election, it either gets ugly if Trump tries to sit it out or a new election will happen.
But there needs to be a billionaire leader who pays for the expenses because people on their own are stuck in their routines.
What expenses? If everyone is on a general strike, there’s nowhere to spend money.
And honestly, your suggestion sounds like we’re trying to trade one evil billionaire dictator for another evil billionaire dictator on the off chance that the new one won’t destroy the global economy as thoroughly. That’s not actually an improvement.
People have to be convinced to go on a general strike. USA spent $5 billion in Ukraine, so with 10 times the population it will take $50 billion to get things going.
You always trade billionaires. People don’t act on their own so there is always essentially one rich group fighting another.
The fascinating thing is that there is no billionaire group opposing Trump. So there must be a convincing argument to keep everybody in line.
The problem is that to do anything of consequence, those people need to leave their homes and take action. And they’d rather juat sit at home and continue “organizing” online…
No, they don’t have to leave for consequences. If they don’t leave and don’t go to work, civilization will stop and Trump cannot continue. Then if there is a joined demand for a new election, it either gets ugly if Trump tries to sit it out or a new election will happen.
But there needs to be a billionaire leader who pays for the expenses because people on their own are stuck in their routines.
What expenses? If everyone is on a general strike, there’s nowhere to spend money.
And honestly, your suggestion sounds like we’re trying to trade one evil billionaire dictator for another evil billionaire dictator on the off chance that the new one won’t destroy the global economy as thoroughly. That’s not actually an improvement.
People have to be convinced to go on a general strike. USA spent $5 billion in Ukraine, so with 10 times the population it will take $50 billion to get things going.
You always trade billionaires. People don’t act on their own so there is always essentially one rich group fighting another.
The fascinating thing is that there is no billionaire group opposing Trump. So there must be a convincing argument to keep everybody in line.