Let’s examine the strong man’s statements. Simply saying them won’t make them true, so there must be some kind of action following them. All of them are of course totalitarian and don’t give many options to work with, making it easier to see what a train-wreck this guy would be (I’m assuming he has the power to enact these actions, not even Trump was powerful or dumb enough to actually enact many of these):
No, hobos, you can’t live on our streets.
- Since they have no home and also can’t live on your streets, where the hell should they live? Do you try to force them to move to Mexico and Canada? Or how about helping them, giving them support and homes that they can go to instead of living on the streets? But no, judging from your rethoric there is pretty much just the option that you want them to die outside the eyes of the public. And that’s if you aren’t fantasizing about shooting all of them.
No, criminals, you don’t get to commit crimes.
- Well, unless they are the strong man and his buddies of course. Also how does stating this actually make it happen? Strengthening the police to the point that they are equipped with military gear and putting even small scale offenders into prison for ridiculously long times, where they are being used as pretty much slave labor has obviously not helped at all. Or do you want to just kill them all too? But crime isn’t genetic, and there will always be crime as long as it promises a profit in one way or the other, no matter the risk. Your strong man won’t change that and in fact, increasingly totalitarian states usually have vast amounts of corruption and power abuse going on. Or is that not a crime for you?
No, Pentagon, you are going to focus on winning wars.
- That’s just laughably stupid. “If I say that we win wars, we’ll win wars!”, said the fascist before losing the war. Also the statement is strange in general. Why the no in front of it? What else does the Pentagon do that strong man doesn’t agree with?
No, academia, you do not get to take our money and use it to turn our kids into little commie saps.
- Ah, because anti-intellectualism has always helped any country engaging in it, right? Pol Pot was such a visionary apparently! Fuck you and your propaganda, if learning more about the world turns you into a socialist then that should tell you something and I would certainly ask myself in your position whether it is wise to go against that. Not that I think any of you idiots would think that rationally about it.
No, tech jerks, you do not get to decide what we can read and say.
- I’m not the biggest fan of big tech either, but honestly, you just said that your strong man will stop academia from teaching unimpeded, so you are already showing your hypocrisy. Let me guess, the strong man, not the “tech jerks” should ultimately decide what we can read and say and you would be totally fine with that right?
No, climate cultists, we are not going to live in caves because of your bizarre, quasi-religious weather obsession.
- Hahahahaha, wow, if that’s not the pot calling the kettle black! Your love for some fascist leader is a “bizzare and quasi-religious cult”, not the fear of humanity making the planet less and less habitable for ourselves for short-term economic gains. Your (and therefore strong man’s) ignorance is palpable!
No, media, you do not get to be partisan advocates and also treated like neutral truth tellers.
- Unless it is Fox News, or Breitbart, or… But those of course are obviously right in everything you say, isn’t it so?
No, Democrats, you don’t get to steal elections.
- Phew, finally a realistic statement, after all they never have and they never will! At last an easy and not-crazy, -fascist and -ignorant goal! Democrats will probably be a bit confused about never even considering doing it, but no party in general should steal elections, so that’s fine.
… oh, you meant that it is only wrong for Democrats and if the Republicans try it it’s fine of course. Yeah, go to hell asshole and take your strong man fetish with you.