• debanqued@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      The local govs taking direct action. The state gov may be controlled by human rights hostile republicans at the state level, but there are many smaller governments within the state controlled by liberals.

      And to be clear, the use of “state” in your quote was the generic sense of the word.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        What kind of fantasy land are you living in where local governments have any power at all to make state governments do anything?

        • debanqued@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          And to be clear, the use of “state” in your quote was the generic sense of the word.

          (emphasis added)

          • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            You’re talking about Republicans but then saying “state” is a generic word.

            But anyway, assuming you mean nation-states, what makes you think there’s anything preventing nation-states from just letting their people starve? They do it all the time.

            • debanqued@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              You’re talking about Republicans but then saying “state” is a generic word.

              I’m saying when I personally used the word “state” in the bit that you quoted, I was using the generic meaning of state. It’s an overloaded word (multiple meanings). What I mean by the “generic meaning” is that I was not referring to the state level jurisdiction. E.g. if the context were Texas, my use of the word “state” was not the state of Texas in that quote. The word state can simply mean government at any level. A federal government (aka nation state) can also generically be referred to as the “state”, even though it’s not state as the jurisdictional construct that composes the United States.

              Likewise, even a local government like a city or county can be generically called the “state”. So to answer your question, the state of Texas can ban welfare checks from the state level in the whole state of Texas, but a lower (non-republican controlled) government can circumvent that by offering food and shelter instead of checks.

              Welfare can happen at any level. I went to the emergency room and racked up a 4-figure hospital bill, and said “I have no insurance or income”. It was no problem… the county had financial aid that I qualified for. The county paid the bill for me, not the state¹ or fed.

              1. in that case, I mean state in the sense of a jurisdictional construct.