I do like how Illinois has setup a commission to track accountability. https://ilac.illinois.gov/
I feel like those of us in the technology sector have a obligation to assist in the counter balance to the police state that is rapidly building up. After all the executives of our companies have clearly chosen their side (Musk, Thiel, Ellison, Cook, Zuckerberg).
One idea is creating a site to track incidents, collect testimony, video evidence of events as they happen. If we can't be physically there to confront them at least we can share evidence and put it in front of as many eyeballs as we can. It wouldn't be a pleasant project, being a sin eater has its own costs. It would at least be something though.
Does anyone else have projects or ideas that can be contributed to?
https://www.realtimefascism.com/ice-sight (appears to be inactive as of this comment)
https://themarkup.org/tools/2025/04/16/law-enforcement-ice-c...
Many American's risk homelessness and violence outside of the corporate world. The control over money used for housing and healthcare lies entirely within the hands of corporate intrests driven by these executives. Until a viable alternative can be discovered for addressing housing and healthcare issues, no reasonable resistance amongst tech workers can be organized.
Many within the tech world, would love to build and produce technology that competes with the corporate interests you described, but lack secure housing or healthcare to do so.
Please note, that this does not require a 'solution' to the problem, but rather an alternative.
Rather, go find leftist groups and get vetted to participate with them. You'll find like minded people, including other people working on technical countermeasures.
The groups are messy and sometimes incoherent (leftist infighting is a meme) but as of late they've become much more focused on a being pragmatic so nobody is going to make you quote marx or anything.
Donate to mutual aid organizations that provide legal advice and support. The Trump admin is breaking a ton of laws but they aren't breaking all of them. The legal system is more important now than ever. Making sure that people know what they can do to interfere with ICE is important. Funding legal teams for people detained by ICE is important.
Donate to mutual aid organizations that provide financial support. Somebody who is afraid to go to work because ICE might be there still needs to pay rent. An organization that funnels money to these people protects people.
Agitate for dems that give a shit. The way this ends is if dems win in 2026 and 2028 and actually take steps to punish the people who have committed these crimes and to dismantle the systems that enabled this in the first place. If instead we get the dems doing what Labor is doing and trying to be a just-slightly-less-evil nativist organization then we are fucking doomed. Documentation of these crimes will be important for making the libs unable to just say "well let's all move on" like they did in 2021.
What alarms me here is that once a certain level of investment and industry is built, it will necessitate a means of self-sustaining itself and will attempt to find this through political investment. I fully expect a domestic version of the "perpetual foreign wars" concept to appear within my lifetime where we go from one domestic emergency requiring huge policing resources to another, ensuring the industry gets funding.
Whatever Christofascism is today, will be boiled down to its fundamental components the moment it no longer serves the powerful so that it can be remade into whatever they need it to be. Think of it more as the rotting of one religion giving way to the fertile ground of new relgion.
Slavery was justified by Christian principles, and manifest destiny. Hitler was inspired by America's genocide of native Americans, racial segregation and eugenics (all of which were justified by Christianity.) And after the war, the US carried the torch of Nazism's racist ideas after the rest of the world tried to move beyond it.
Many conservative ideals are backed by Christian belief. They hate feminism because it undermines the tradition Christian ideal of gender hierarchy. They hate homosexuality because they believe the Bible says it's a sin. They hate communists because communism is atheist. And most of all they believe the US was founded as an explicitly Christian nation and should be governed only by Christian principles.
9/11 happens and Bush declares a new "Crusade" against the evildoers. That language wasn't accidental. The connections between the American military industrial complex and Evangelical Christianity run deep.
And now we have Trump, whom a significant number of Americans believe to have literally been sent by God to wage spiritual warfare against demonic forces within the government, citing Christianity explicitly as justification for his militarism.
And it's absolutely not a coincidence that we reached this inflection point and acceleration after electing a Black president. That broke America in ways that I don't think that it can ever recover from. It certainly isn't a flavor of the month. If anything it's the only truly unifying ideology America has ever had.
I think you're correct that religion can be used as a tool by the powerful, but the typical cynical assumption that no one in power actually believes any of it is I think a mistake. Maybe not Trump, I suspect he's too much of a narcissist to believe in anything but himself and is an example of what you're referring to, but I think the people around him whispering in his ear and many of his supporters are true believers.
A few years ago before the election, a friend and I often joked that you could probably sell a sizable portion of American right on something of a “five year plan”
The MAGA communism meme was going around at the time too. Traditional Cold War era “better dead than red” conservatives I knew were suddenly posting about nationalizing companies that weren’t playing ball with Trump.
The other day, I saw an account rambling about “Anglo-Saxon victory over Judeo-Bolshevik Materialism”. I found that a bit odd. I’ve heard the “Judeo-Bolshevik” schtick, and there’s certainly endless negative aspects of communism, but materialism certainly is not one of them.
But your connection with Atheism ties things together in a way that makes sense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialism
It is one of the important parts. If you lived under communist rule you'd have to pass exams in "diamat" to get any advanced education.
I’ve joked occasionally we should just hand the zealots power as they’d quickly go back to just killing each other over theology.
Wouldn’t you know it all the smug religious revival accounts from unemployed zoomers that have recently flooded my social media seem more interested in attacking different Christian sects. My Facebook has been looking like the 30 years war recently.
Diehards specifically recruited for their commitment to the cause.
They will be the ones making jokes while digging mass graves.
False.
SA was essentially a militia which functioned manly as the NSDAP's non-governmental terror group. As soon as NSDAP took power, Hitler used the SS to take control of the SA and assume its functions. The transition was bloody, the top commander of the SA was executed by Hitler and its leadership purged or killed, see the Night of the Long Knives.
The SA was never a government entity with any significant functions or budget.
SS = ICE
I do believe a productive hierarchy of power could naturally emerge if everyone were equally equipped with technology. For example, if all State financial transactions were auditable by anyone (say, via immutable ledger) - would this not lead to favorable outcomes without the necessitating the chaos of anarchy?
Not saying it couldn’t be for bigger things, just that there does not have to be a rational need other than handing out money.
Even MAGA didn't vote for this.
Go to a country that deserves your tourism, US is not worth visiting.
Be sure to create your ESTA a few workdays before though, as long as you have it you will have a great time.
As usual, something else is being used as the excuse to distract people from what's really the end goal: enriching some group.
Paramilitary, high tech equipment, close to zero accountability. It's not far off that the people they're snatching don't have any legal means to fight it either, similar to how palestinians are held in 'administrative detention' and only have access to extremely corrupt military courts.
I suspect that negotiation is not going to get either states or popular movements very far against this threat.
Pretty easy to switch from targeting “immigrants” to “dissidents“
manbart•1mo ago
Ritewut•1mo ago
AnotherGoodName•1mo ago
tomrod•1mo ago
Someone1234•1mo ago
shafyy•1mo ago
Someone1234•1mo ago
66%~ of the US either voted for this, or were indifferent about it, and are a group which cannot be deported/denaturalized. Perhaps that group should step up instead of the <1% who are most at risk from legal administrative threats.
I think it quite telling hearing born-Americans asking green card and naturalized citizens to be their "resistance" for decisions they themselves made. Reads like looking for cannon fodder, who can just be trivially deported/denaturalized while the immune citizenship sits back and points at how bad things are.
Ritewut•1mo ago
itsdrewmiller•1mo ago
shafyy•1mo ago
In the end though, the targeted and vulnerable group need to stand up for themselves, others won't do it. I know it sucks, but it's the reality unfortunately. And yes, others from more comfortable groups should also make a stand (and some people are), but history shows that not many will.
expedition32•1mo ago
Meanwhile Americans who "vote with their feet" will be stopped.
morkalork•1mo ago
Everyone is making the comparison to China but when I see comments like this, I think of countries like Russia where street interviews of the average citizen invariably result in answers like "I'm not political" and "I have no opinion"
throw0101c•1mo ago
They're now floating that birthright citizenship under the 14th isn't really a birthright:
* https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/prot...
* https://www.npr.org/2025/03/14/nx-s1-5327552/trump-takes-bir...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_Un...
azinman2•1mo ago
Except without the long term thinking and investment.
CSSer•1mo ago
throw-12-16•1mo ago
vkou•1mo ago
I'd have figured that if you were looking at historic examples of the US being a police state, the Jim Crow South would have been a better one, or if you were a homosexual, really, any time prior to the 90s.
bdangubic•1mo ago
vkou•1mo ago
(I'm also not entirely sure why they are touching your junk, I've not had that happen in any of my security checkpoint experiences.)
Look, while I'm as happy as the next person to bitch about how awful the TSA is, if they are your best example of the US being a police state... It's not particularly persuasive. Most police states don't limit their capacity for repression to throwing you out of an airport without a refund for your ticket.
throw-12-16•1mo ago
bdangubic•1mo ago
mindslight•1mo ago
What is with this tendency to downplay the current drastic escalations? It feels like a kind of hipster denialism - "I was complaining about the US being a police state before it was cool" but also if it's this is "nothing new" then there's nothing to really earnest worry about, right?
How hard is it to acknowledge that we have been gradually losing our rights AND that the Trumpist bonfire is a marked departure into something much more rapid?
Surely you can see the difference between a society where occasional flagrant abuses happen but the majority can still speak out about them, versus a society where abuses are routine and anybody who speaks out becomes a target at scale?
throw-12-16•1mo ago
mindslight•1mo ago
But of course now I'm on the other side of the argument. The point is that even though it's a long arc, this doesn't invalidate the current urgency. "Slow at first, then all at once"
throw-12-16•1mo ago
Latinos are the current targets, but they weren’t the first.
mindslight•1mo ago
But also, am I supposed to come away with the conclusion that this is all in line with business as usual and there is nothing to worry about as long as I am white?
throw-12-16•1mo ago
America has been a racist cesspool for hundreds of years, but since 2001 it has also become a highly advanced surveillance state that has militarized its own police force.
You may not like it, but this has been developing for 25 years and has just now started to (barely) affect white people.
mindslight•1mo ago
Also driving this conversation towards race reeks of race-to-the-bottom "privilege" politics. Which is why I facetiously asked if your intention is to encourage white people to become less concerned.
throw-12-16•1mo ago
Habit I retained from University.
mindslight•1mo ago
And FWIW I only threw that out to make a speed bump for the fascists who want to write off everyone disagreeing with them as some blue haired progressive. You can try actually addressing my points, either in this tiny thread or in the more substantial branch above. I promise I will try to not dump knee jerk reflexive dismissals at you the way "Libertarians" often to.
scarecrowbob•1mo ago
I say this as a person who has been pepper sprayed by DHS while resisting ICE:
the conditions to led to the current bonfire have a lot to do with centrist folks piling up wood as if could never be lit.
If you ignore how we got here you will be unable to understand where really are.
throw-12-16•1mo ago
The data harvesting of the US surveillance state was 100% enabled by SV.
Guys like Zuckerberg, Page, and Brin are modern day Oppenheimers in all the worst ways.
mindslight•1mo ago
I say this as a libertarian who's right there with you on the "piling up wood".
There are many angles from which to analyze how we got here. Yes, the "centrists" supporting lazy authoritarian laws and agencies because they couldn't bother thinking one step ahead to how they'd be abused. The sprawling surveillance industry pointed out by a sibling comment. Narrower issues of destruction of the fairness doctrine and campaign finance limits. Even many of the refrains of the Trumpists point to problems that were slowly allowed to fester until they reached a breaking point (although as usual for Republicans, the answer they've been stage-managed into is completely self-defeating).
For all of these things it's understandable to want to say "I told you so" - for catharsis, and trying to establish some authority of having a larger context of what direction we need to head in.
But none of that justifies downplaying the situation we're currently staring down, which is what I take issue with.
(also re being pepper sprayed: what's left of your country thanks you for your service)
scarecrowbob•1mo ago
Maybe we read things differently- I don't see folks who say "this is nothing new, the US has always been ethically questionable" as "downplaying" anything.
As I've written here before, there is a difference between "hey, welcome to the party" (radicalization) and "hey shut up, this is a thing we've always done" (normalization).
I take issue with (and find very frustrating) the idea that somehow things have just now reached a breaking point.
I find that incorrect-to-me idea worrisome on two levels.
First of all, if Clinton or Harris had been elected we'd still be walking down this same road but liberals would be at brunch and telling us that nothing is wrong. But Ferguson and Standing Rock both happened while Obama was in office. And we don't need to run another experiment to see how it would have run under Harris, as she explicitly was moving to the right from Biden.
The flip side of your suspicion that folks in my position are just perversely enjoying some kind of schadenfreude might be that folks who believe this situation to be new and unique is to note that while this violent empire has been violent-empire-ing for far longer than any of us have been alive, the violence hasn't been overtly staged within the spectacle confronting the "middle class" folks until very recently.
The distinction between "bureaucratic authoritarianism" and "autocratic authoritarianism" only matters if you show up the bureaucracy in a legible way, and the fact that this is a distinction you draw places you in a very specific relationship to the power which "it's always been violent" seeks to critique.
Or to say the same thing in a different way, for the same reasons you might point to some perverse enjoyment by hipsters, you might look at your own psyche here:
to admit that the US has always been violent is to admit that you didn't care because it wasn't happening to people about whom you care.
However, that possible reading of your position is -wholly immaterial- to the folks who are pointing out "it's been bad for a long time".
The catharsis you seem to be projecting isn't really there for the people who could see there was a problem before it became visible even to middle class liberals. So an aside, nobody cares that folks ignored the problem until we are where we are, so feel your feelings about your blindness and then get to work, and stop projecting.
Do, however, consider that the lines of thought which lead people to directly and painfully confront power in a physical way can only come from the idea that the power being confronted is not and has not been legitimate.
I only dive into the phrenology of your position because it seems funny to me, but I do think that position is an active and harmful impediment to actually doing anything- if we could just vote our way home, why bother walking?
That is, if it really was okay a while ago, why not just do the blue version of making America great again?
And that leads to a second level at why I find the idea that "things have just gotten worse this year" to be almost dangerous:
the situation can and likely will get more authoritarian.
The reality to me is that these systems have been violent in the past- I live on land next to the Southern Ute folks' reservation, and I have had Navajo roommates, and I can see a former residential school every time I drive to town.
There is no amount of being white or tall or "well-educated" that would save me if the ancestors of the folks who built those things decide I am no longer a "citizen" because "reasons" and burn my corpse so it ascends to some gulag in the sky.
But if these systems haven't been incredibly harmful, abandoning them seems foolish and dumb. Any action to undermine their authority takes on the same character of a "rejection of the standard norms of good faith execution of [the] government".
I wholly understand why anarchists and communists seem stupid and dangerous to the folks who have historically been able to ignore the harms of these systems.
For that reason, though, folks are going to have to give up some of their ideological attachments to those systems if they are going to work against them.
So from my position, actively being unwilling to admit the past harms cause by those systems is a very easy way to prevent oneself from coming to a position where you actually have to do anything material.
Sorry for writing a novel (as an aside I dislike AI because writing things like this is how I think through things and I think the adoption of AI writing says a lot about the willingness of folks to think). But as a person incredibly worried about the very real shift in character of the current political spectacle, I think that "it's new and improved" is a harmful idea that you should reconsider.
mindslight•1mo ago
I had never voted for either major party in a national election until 2020, when I consider myself having voted for the conservative option of Biden. In 2016, I completely understood why people voted for Trump - I was the one telling my aghast blue tribe friends that he was speaking to people's longstanding frustrations and had a good chance of winning.
I do constantly examine whether I've reverted to my latent tribe or have become caught in a filter bubble, but I still do not think so. I've always been allergic to groupthink, and the Trumpist groupthink is still overwhelming at this point, whereas the opposition groupthink is much more narrowly-scoped. (and I hate it as well, as it makes for poor opposition)
So back to the main argument -
I don't see folks who say "this is nothing new, the US has always been ethically questionable" as "downplaying" anything.
To me, it often does comes across this way. Note how the comment I initially responded to put "madness" in square quotes, as if we're supposed to believe the concerns are just all in our heads.
It's adjacent to the Trumpist talking point that everything being done isn't any worse than what "the left" already did, which is clearly coming from a place of wanting to downplay. And there is a long pattern of Trumpists abusing appeals to lofty ideals and liberty in general to get people to support the openly fascist agenda [0]. It's not a matter of being "unwilling to admit the past harms", rather it's about bringing them up in the appropriate context - Trumpism revolves around a long litany of real grievances and hypocrisies, but then channels that anger into highly destructive "solutions".
And as far as the caricature of "middle-class liberals" that you were addressing? If people are just now waking up, I do not see this as something to condemn! To me the actual concern is preventing them from falling back asleep (eg that "just vote Democrat" fallacy)
> The distinction between "bureaucratic authoritarianism" and "autocratic authoritarianism" only matters if you show up the bureaucracy in a legible way, and the fact that this is a distinction you draw places you in a very specific relationship to the power which "it's always been violent" seeks to critique.
Care to elaborate on this? My initial reaction is that we should take such legibility as a universal goal, in the sense that we should aim for everyone to have this legibility. We often shit on the idea of bureaucracy, but if it's the best way we've found to neuter autocratic power, then maybe we need to stop taking it for granted? (FWIW me of 15 years ago is screaming at current me for having written that)
[0] actually I just glanced at the poster's comment history and this is exactly what they're doing.
bdangubic•1mo ago
Exactly this is core issue with a lot of people here on HN. The argument goes “oh shit, look what the current 2025 looks like, OMG so bad, we were this amazing bastion of freedom before this and now this administration is doing _____” so shortsighted and un-educated
bdangubic•1mo ago
You are 100% right, we have been (not so) gradually losing our rights and Trump et al isn’t really lighting any bonfires, the country has been burning for decades… it is just that the current fires are broadcasted to a wider audience with minute-by-minute play-by-play. and while most people are falling for this shit again (see 2016-2020) the current admin is lining their pockets (which is the one and only goal they have…)