Resonosity

The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.

Irrelevant to this conversation.

Persons faced with an unconstitutional licensing law which purports to require a license as a prerequisite to exercise of right… may ignore the law and engage with impunity in exercise of such right.

By this logic, voter registration isn't in the constitution, so you might be able to make the argument that it violates the 14th, 15th, 19th, and 24th amendments. Again, by this logic, regardless of if people have proper voting registration or any voting registration at all, they should still be able to vote anyways. The 4 Democrats mentioned in the above article pass a law against the above.

The state cannot diminish the rights of the people.

Tell that to the Republicans that introduced the above bill.

there can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights

What about the right to protest of UCLA students last April being violated because of false claims of anti-semitism, or the right to protest of Columbia students last March because of similar false claims? Did the US care about imposing sanctions or penalties on those people, or did they just detain and deport them instead?

a person cannot be compelled “to purchase, through a license fee or a license tax, the privilege freely granted by the constitution.”

Again, tell that to Republicans that introduced the above bill.

Socialism doesn't preclude the rehabilitation of America.

You and I agree on this. Abandoning capitalism doesn't mean America needs to be destroyed, and adopting socialism doesn't mean America can't be rehabilitated.

I don't think you're following your own argument here.

Your original claim refuted the view of the Original Commenter (OC) who thought capitalism always wins, or seeks to concentrate wealth and therefore power in the hands of the few despite the needs of the many. I don't want to assume what your views on capitalism are. Do you think we should keep it as an organization of the economy? Or are there better alternatives? Regulation on capitalism is not a solution imo. As we've seen with Trump and Bush, politicians can be bought out to represent corporate interests, and can install anti-regulation pundits to undermine progress.

Are you trying to say all socialist call for the destruction of America?

Quite the opposite. I'm saying I think you say all socialists call for the destruction of America because from how you've presented yourself, you don't recognize the variation in political philosophy on the left. My first comment to you tried to illuminate this variation by refuting your worldview that authoritarian, tankie communism applies to all forms of leftist ideologies, when there are others that don't include such levels of authority.

I'm not trying to argue. I'm trying to educate.

Pretty much sums up your entire philosophy and why no one takes tankies seriously.

Per your original comment, yes. Pro communist tankies aren't the same as socialists. Wish more people wouldn't make that equation.

It'd be like me saying that liberals are just MAGAts, when you clearly have different liberal factions like centrists and Social Democrats, and conservative factions like libertarians and fascists.

Another reason to go vegan:

Your butter won't have shit in it!

Yeah when they started name calling, it was pretty much over for their argument.

Thanks for sticking up for yours and my point of view. There are many contradictions in our capitalist state, and it seems like people would rather be in denial of it than come to terms with it.

Rejecting capitalism doesn't equate to accepting authoritarianism, although many people seem to equate socialism with its authoritative flavor automatically.

There are other possibilities, like basic socialism, anarchism, and communitarianism.

people were immigrating from Europe

The linguistically correct term her would be emigrating from Europe.

to the US

This is immigrating.

emigrating to Europe

This is immigration.

from the US

The word you're looking for is emigration.

emigrating from Europe

You're correct here.

to the US

Once again, immigration.

immigrating to Europe

This is the linguistically correct use of the term.

from the US

Proper word would be emigrating.

Easiest solution is to say migrating

Migration by itself doesn't indicate whether you're referring to domestic-only movement, where people migrate inside of a country, or domestic-to-foreign where they cross a border, or foreign-to-foreign movement.

It all depends on the boundary you set.

If your chosen boundary is Europe, people moving to Europe are immigrating there, and people moving from Europe are emigrating there.

If your chosen boundary is the US, immigration is moving to the US while emigration is moving from the US.

Since migration isn't specific and can refer to any of the above cases, I prefer transmigration since "trans-" refers to "across" which I often interpret as "out from and in to".

We don't need to give up on prepositions in order to have more accurate language.

The majority of the population has departed from reality.

According to Ballotpedia, ~63.9% of the eligible US voting population (older than 18) turned out to vote, or ~155 mn people. This means ~36.1% didn't turn out, or ~88 mn people out of the ~243 mn total population. In 2020, the turnout rate was ~66.6% or ~158 mn, meaning ~33.4% or ~79 mn didn't vote out of the ~238 mn total population.

According again to Ballotpedia, ~77 mn voted R in 2024 (~49.8% of the voting population or ~31.8% of the total population), ~75 mn voted D (~48.3% of the voting population or ~30.8% of the total population), and ~3 mn voted 3rd party (~1.9% of the voting population or 1.2% of the total population).

In 2020, ~81 mn voted D (~51.3% of the voting population or ~34.2% of the total population), ~74 mn voted R (~46.9% of the voting population or ~31.2% of the total population), and ~3 mn voted 3rd party (1.8% of the voting population or ~1.2% of the total population).

You say majority, but clearly less than a third of adults in 2024 voted R.

I don't think we can say why the other ~88 million didn't vote. Sure, maybe some of them share a reality that diverges from the rest of the world. But we can speculate some other reasons too: maybe they were too apathetic because their party ran on issues not necessarily aligned to the views of their own, maybe they had to go to work to earn a paycheck, maybe they were turned away from the ballot box, maybe Joe Biden's approval ratings tanked and upon dropping out of the race, many people on election day still thought he was running, maybe Kamala didn't diverge enough away from Biden (or Republicans) to make a meaningful difference in voters' eyes, and maybe some of them didn't think women should be in office, with gender inequality still a prescient issue.

I liked Tim Walz's analogy in response to the Democrats' performance in 2024:

If a teacher teaches a subject, quizzes their class afterwards, and finds that less 100% of the class pass, the fault for that performance doesn't lie with the kids. The fault lies with the teacher. The teacher needs to teach concepts in multiple ways using different pedagogical methods to activate as many kids as possible.

Politicians are the same for me. If people aren't voting for you, a politician needs to speak to (and sometimes educate) the public in more ways than just one - and do so effectively.

Democrats dropped the ball this year. It still seems like they're dropping the ball in Congress. We'll see what the party does. I'd recommend they look to the progressive caucus with Bernie Sanders and AOC for the answer.

In my view, "migrate" according to Etymonline originates from the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root *mei which means "to change, go, move".

I don't believe this term refers to moving in or out of something, or any other preposition.

As we've been discussing in this post, immigrate and emigrate represent inverses of each other. It makes sense to look for logical ways to combine those.

I think the best prefix for this would be trans- for, according to Etymonline, this means "across, beyond, through, on the other side of; go beyond". Specifically, I would refer to trans- as meaning "out from and in to", which gives us the word "transmigrate". Etymonline has a dictionary entry for "transmigration".

It looks like Merriam-Webster, Oxford, and American Heritage dictionaries support "transmigrate" as an entry.

According to Etymonline,

Immigrate = in- "into, in, on, upon" from PIE root *en + migrare "to move" from PIE root *mei

Emigrate = assimilated form of ex- "out" from PIE root *eghs + migrare "to move" from PIE root *mei

So I guess to correct usage would be:

Immigrating to Europe/US

Emigrating from US/Europe

Trump received ~32% votes of eligible voters in the 2024 US General. So that statistic is pretty on the mark

That's true, but the meme quite clearly says that Trump got 50.8%.

You're wrong Lemming