WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

871

I'm having trouble with this. I'm thinking they have to use those terms because it's a meaningless position that holds no power in our government.

I'm having trouble with this. I'm thinking they have to use those terms because it's a meaningless position that holds no power in our government.

(post is archived)

[–] 1 pt (edited )

Every single appointed position in government is basically a minister or czar.. we just don’t typically use that language to describe it.. we say flowery shit like “director” and “secretary” instead.

So to answer your question, for a long fucking time.

“Minister” and “czar” are considered pejoratives in this country. When some fuckstick bureaucrat starts acting like a little mini-dictator shit head, we call them that because they deserve it.

That said, to my knowledge there has never been a public appointed position within a federal law enforcement agency with the sole purpose of being the national thought police..that is, until now.

The problem isn’t so much that directors or secretaries exist in the bureaucracy - though you could argue against them I’m sure..the problem is what this particular one is charged to do and the fact that she is operating out of a law enforcement agency. Individual critical thought isn’t a crime, but this implies that they intend to treat it as a crime for the fact that this new bureaucracy is part of a national law enforcement bureaucracy.