A friend who works in the federal government found this on reddit and is passing it around. I quite like it.
For those who don’t know, all federal workers received an e-mail entitled “Fork in the Road” asking them for a deferred resignation. They have not taken kindly to it.
I appreciate the feedback! It’s already 8.5x11, but I didn’t think of what it would look like in greyscale. When I tried, the blue and the red looked almost the same. (Side note, the roundel being only the star and “wings” actually had an interesting look that I may play with more.)
Here’s an update. I agree that putting the roundel in the center looks better. I also made a version with a blue border and red writing. In greyscale, of course, they look virtually identical.
So, I liked your idea, and I threw together something pretty quickly. I was using a stylized omega at the bottom, but it wasn’t really working (to my eye at least). Instead, I threw on the U.S. air roundel from World War II. My thinking is that it’s A. a distinctly American symbol, B. Evocative of fighting fascists, and C. Different from the current roundel (which has a red stripe), but similar enough to be recognizable comfortable.
I’d love some feedback. I’ve got another couple I’m working on, too, that can be ready to share soon.
This is a great point, and I love the idea of picking specific issues! I do think some general “Fascists beware” style fliers would be good, though, at least from perspective of making them feel less secure. But I see what you mean that “fascist” doesn’t really meet the mark and could be misinterpreted. What is a less loaded term? “Trumpists”? “MAGAs”? (MAGAT is too loaded and negative)
Ah, gotcha. I didn’t go too deep into the code, just did a cursory look. I think it’s still an interesting concept.
Great stuff! If anyone knows any federal workers and contractors, please pass this to them over secure methods. Most of the suggestions presented are in the context of office workplaces, and the most effective people will be those people.
I don’t know why this is getting downvoted. It seems like an interesting concept for certain use cases, and it looks like it’s just a tiny team.
Yep. Edited. Thanks for catching that!
Yeah, it’s pretty dated, and some of it just doesn’t work. If there’s a newer version, it’s probably classified. Though, the stuff in the back about office work and everyday type stuff still applies.
Really, I think it should be used as a starting point to start thinking about resistance. For example, although not specifically mentioned, an IT tech can “accidentally” misconfigure a service to make it unavailable. Similarly, if you’re a straight white male, you can raise a pride flag or the flag of a Central American country. It’s not illegal, and it can force a small amount of resources to be diverted to investigating you rather than a minority.
There are a million ways to creatively resist that also don’t cause collateral damage. The goal is to sap their resources and morale.
Everyone can do something, even if it’s small. Simple sabotage like non-compliance, malicious compliance, malicious incompetence, “forgetting” in a way detrimental to the government, even just vocally/visibly supporting minorities and denouncing the current government helps.
Not everyone realizes this, but if you spread the word on these simple methods, we can slow them down and frustrate their plans. And that is an act of resistance, too.
We can! Everyone can take part in small acts of resistance. If you haven’t already, the OSS (precursor to the CIA) circulated pamphlets in nazi-occupied countries to help ordinary citizens fight the nazis. Here it is if you’re interested: Simple Sabotage Field Manual
It’s a fundamental misunderstanding of what Section 31 is supposed to be. Sloan wasn’t a good guy. 31 actively tried to commit genocide.
The idea behind them is that arguments of ends justifying the means and “getting dirty” to preserve higher ideals is morally, philosophically, and practically bankrupt. The Federation didn’t need 31 to win the war, and in fact, their methods would have made it much worse. Section 31 as a plot device exists to show us that there will always be those looking to use higher ideals to support terrible actions, and we must be constantly vigilant against them.
It truly pains me how that message has been twisted, and people think Section 31 are not only good guys but also cool.
It’ll most likely be on a per-unit or sub-unit basis. Hell, not even every platoon will likely act as one…
If an illegal order comes down (because very many things are immoral but not illegal), there is a duty to not follow the order. That said, I’d imagine that the military will split. By how much is determinant on the method. An immoral/illegal order will probably lead to the split being mostly on the side against the government, e.g. being deployed specifically to shoot civilians. An immoral/legal order will likely end up with most staying with the government. Let’s hope Trump and his lackeys don’t have their lawyers look at things too closely…
Now, the real trouble comes in with something like simply deploying the active duty or federalized Guard within the country. No technical orders to shoot or do anything objectionable. Simply existing and “guarding” would likely be illegal under the Posse Comitatus act, but presence is not immoral. For this, I really don’t know how it would land.