Sean McElwee sounds pretty jazzed that the Green New Deal would require an actual revolution

We’ve noted again and again how progressives like to talk about revolution but always seem to forget they’re the ones who have voluntarily disarmed themselves, leaving themselves with protest marches, sit-ins, and hashtag campaigns as the best tools in their arsenal.

Nation contributor Sean McElwee, whose boldest attempt at revolution so far seems to be to “make it painful” for Republicans to stay Republicans by refusing to invite them for drinks after work until they get their minds right, perked up when he heard that the Green New Deal would require an actual revolution.

Here’s the Washington Examiner’s Philip Klein to explain:

When I say Green New Deal would require a revolution, I don't mean it in the loose sense (like Reagan Revolution) — I mean it more like the French Revolution or Russian Revolution — ie, would have to topple the existing structure of government https://t.co/yduQiTwp0W

— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) February 12, 2019

There is no way a Green New Deal passes without abolishing the Senate. Any government structure that gives veto power to a chamber with equal representation for smaller, coal-dependent states, won't let that happen. https://t.co/yduQiTwp0W

— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) February 12, 2019

In addition, even if you enacted a Green New Deal in Congress, you couldn't implement as intended with current structure which gives deference to states and allows them and individuals to file legal challenges https://t.co/yduQiTwp0W

— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) February 12, 2019

So, to pass & enact a Green New Deal, you'd basically need to topple the current government with a revolution,abolish the Senate, create a new system in which govt declared emergency powers for at least the few decades that it took to transform the economy https://t.co/yduQiTwp0W

— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) February 12, 2019

Of course, most of the clowns in Klein’s replies are all-in on the Green New Deal, seeing as it’s going to save the world from becoming uninhabitable to live on in just 12 years. Revolution it is, then.

you say that like it’s a bad thing https://t.co/dEOfTrzHaa

— we’re going to pass AVR (@SeanMcElwee) February 12, 2019

Interesting way for a leading Green New Deal activist to react to a column arguing that enacting a GND would require toppling the U.S. government and replacing it with one that suspends elections and declares emergency powers to transform economy for decades. https://t.co/FJECwN9o7w

— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) February 12, 2019

Yeah, but this is the same guy who celebrated the hit middle-class families took in their pensions and 401(k) accounts when the stock market took a dive because at least rich people lost a lot of money that day. It’s not like he thinks things through.

But Phil, this is obviously about lowering greenhouse gas emissions and not at all about gradually seizing the private means of production to public ownership and transforming the republic into a socialist dystopia.

— Tiana Lowe (@TianaTheFirst) February 12, 2019

Stalinism isn’t exactly a new crush for The Nation.

— Will Collier (@willcollier) February 12, 2019

How are you going to stage a revolution when you can't even do a pushup

— Currently between fraudulent suspensions (@jtLOL) February 12, 2019

Yes we need a huge revolution for the country with strongest economy ever

— Joe Schmo (@JoeSchm56355073) February 12, 2019

Bring it, sister.

— Velvety Smirk (@velvetsugar76) February 12, 2019

I'm down…but I dont think it's gonna go like you think it's gonna go.

— Ian (@FreeSpeechAppar) February 12, 2019

Bad for you.

— neontaster (@neontaster) February 12, 2019

oh no im scared

— we’re going to pass AVR (@SeanMcElwee) February 12, 2019

I think the number of socially-conscious twees who own "military-style assault weapons" (to steal a phrase) is, um less than the number of people who aren't planning to line up against a wall just because someone politely asks.

— InTheRightColumn (@TheRightColumn) February 12, 2019

But we have all the guns. I think socialists trying revolution would end poorly for the socialists.

— Leatherneck (@Leatherneck) February 12, 2019

Shhhhh you will ruin the suprise ending.

— 100 million (@100million5) February 12, 2019

Pretty sure the SJWs don’t want to leave mom’s basement, so I think we’re safe for now.

— Victory or Death (@IncognitoMeems) February 12, 2019

You’re not winning that war. But it would be hilarious seeing you folks trying to get vegan and vegetarian meals to the front lines.

— Mike Daitch (@mikedaitch) February 12, 2019

Says the rough and tumble revolutionary type.

— NHiriteInSouth (@NHiriteInSouth) February 12, 2019

You really see revolution working out for you? You could barely jog a mile without a mild heart attack, own zero guns, and I'd bet you've never thrown a punch in your life… pic.twitter.com/pvboWDzq2k

— Egregious Philbin (@Ericworwa) February 12, 2019

Viva Revolution pic.twitter.com/ixvMdW5MRw

— Wesley Kushner (@WesleyKushner) February 12, 2019

What are you going to do, virtue-signal us into submission?

— Aaron Henager (@AaronHenager1) February 12, 2019

Real talk:

Climate change, at worst, will bring slowly developing highly predictable disruptions of agriculture, sea levels and weather events. It will be far more effective and efficient to adjust to those outcomes rather than enact (probably futile) measures to prevent them.

— Otter (@Otter69187916) February 12, 2019

Like humans have been doing ever since there were humans?

Related:

UNITY: Nation contributor wants you to ‘make it painful’ for any Republicans in your social circle https://t.co/MMgSE1E20B

— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) January 21, 2019