Let's not keep making the mistake of assuming Trump's tweets have force of law. He's just talking out of his ass again, just like he's not actually invading greenland and canada. Notice how he's talking about at least 4 different actions here, I'm pretty sure none of which he can actually do. 5 if you count thanking us for our attention to this matter (?). If Trump tries to do anything in this regard no judge* will uphold it.
People in power do what he says. His word is de facto law, even if it’s illegal. It literally does not matter. You are in denial if you think he’s not going to get away with this.
Let's not keep making the mistake of assuming the rule of law matters at this point. If he does something and nobody stops it, its legality or lack there of is moot. If he says to do something and people do it and nobody stops him (or judge's rulings about it are ignored), then it doesn't matter that it was illegal.
I know you're just trying to get people to calm down, but at this point, people are right to be scared and right to think these things could actually come to pass considering it has happened before. Maybe it won't get that far... But plenty has already happened that should never have happened, and the US currently has a president who is illegally, specifically unconstitutionally, holding office and was allowed to be sworn in anyway, so it's probably not a good idea to assume this won't happen just because it's also unconstitutional.
All Federal Funding will STOP for any College, School, or University that allows illegal protests. Agitators will be imprisoned/or permanently sent back to the country from which they came.
All Federal Funding will STOP for any College, School, or University that allows illegal protests. Agitators will be imprisoned/or permanently sent back to the country from which they came.
Friendly reminder to everyone: What is pictured in this image is not a molotov, but a self-immolation device that is likely to explode in the hand.
A molotov, on the other hand, consists of a sealed bottle of fuel with a flaming cloth wrapped around it, which prevents ignition of its contents prior to impact.
this is his plan all alone, one of inner circle wrote the book on geopolitics, and even in the 80 they deemed trump to a potential useful president one day.
Does "NO MASKS" mean that choosing to wear a mask to protect your health is now forbidden at colleges or is there another meaning that I don't understand? It is so random and has nothing to do with the rest of the post except for being "woke".
He’s not supposed to be able to. We’ll see if the administration follows his orders or the existing law, or if they’ll listen to court orders. My hopes are, unfortunately, not high.
For loads of clinically vulnerable people, the right to protest is dependent on the right to mask. You can only risk going to a crowded protest if you’re allowed to use protective measures to prevent infections.
That’s because the people who voted for Trump wanted Trump to win. The people who stayed at home who might not have wanted Trump to win assisted his win by not voting.
But you don't know who non voters would have voted for. A study of non voters in 2020 showed a near even split, so it's nothing but pointless speculation to blame people who didn't vote. And I say this as someone who actually supports compulsory voting. I just find it much more productive, and accurate, to lay blame on those who we do know, for sure, actually voted for this result.
Wait, this seems silly. You are in effect saying that it's wrong to blame those who stayed home because some of them would have voted for trump? Like, we'd still blame those people too had they actually voted trumo.
The blame isn't just because you voted for trump it is because you didn't try to stop him, which applies both to those who voted for him and those who didn't vote.
Those who blame the nonvoters for Trump winning are implying that had they voted, Trump would have lost. We cannot know that and I do not find it productive. Again, I actually am in favour of compulsory voting, so urging people to vote is a good thing that I'm very much for. But I'm not going to blame those who didn't vote for Trump for Trump winning.
I did and replied in kind. No need to resort to insults. If you're not interested in continuing the conversation you don't have to reply. But it will probably just be in circles anyway, so good day.
There are no mental gymnastics, and unless you've been absent in the debate since it began in 2023, it's been one conversation regarding the direction of the Democratic party, with effectively two camps.
The first camp, effectively taking the party line and acting as cheerleaders of the DNC, have taken a "No critisism of the Democratic Party is acceptable; voters need to move to the positions of the DNC" approach.
The second camp took a "The DNC needs to be better and acknowledge it's shortcomings, and make changes when necessary. The DNC needs to align itself with DNC voters and the party base."
The first camp, for the first 8 months of 2024, insisted we had to run Joe Biden. That there were no other possibilities, options, or potential outcomes. They defended the approach the DNC took to the primary process, which was by any measure, the least democratic primary they party had ever held.
The second camp raged at the preposterous farce which was the DNC primary. They pointed out that Bidens poll numbers were so bad he basically had no chance of winning. Th
... show more
There are no mental gymnastics, and unless you've been absent in the debate since it began in 2023, it's been one conversation regarding the direction of the Democratic party, with effectively two camps.
The first camp, effectively taking the party line and acting as cheerleaders of the DNC, have taken a "No critisism of the Democratic Party is acceptable; voters need to move to the positions of the DNC" approach.
The second camp took a "The DNC needs to be better and acknowledge it's shortcomings, and make changes when necessary. The DNC needs to align itself with DNC voters and the party base."
The first camp, for the first 8 months of 2024, insisted we had to run Joe Biden. That there were no other possibilities, options, or potential outcomes. They defended the approach the DNC took to the primary process, which was by any measure, the least democratic primary they party had ever held.
The second camp raged at the preposterous farce which was the DNC primary. They pointed out that Bidens poll numbers were so bad he basically had no chance of winning. That by insisting on this losing strategy we were losing critical time.
Bans were made, here, regarding this debate. And the first camp was wrong. There was another way possible.
After the candidates were swapped the first camp further insured that people just needed to move to where the DNC was, after taking effectively a pro genocide, Republican lite campaign philosophy as an outcome of the convention.
The second camp pointed out that this would lose the DNC the election, that we needed our focus to be on moving the candidate to a more popular, more electable position.
The first camp won the argument and lost us all the war, because their fundamental belief in what is being argued and whom they are arguing with is wrong. The first camp is responsible for the millions of votes difference between Kamala and Biden, because they insisted on this losing strategy.
That division is much, much older. The beltway is full of people who benefit from corporations or come from wealthy families and are materially aligned against the working class, and their ideology reflects this. These people as a group stand to lose more from the democrats moving to the left and hurting the bourgeoisie than winning than staying in the middle and losing.
This is a common dynamic historically; liberals in power need the people to maintain power, but their interests aren't aligned with the people, so they pass policies that marginalize their own base of support, and so the conservatives take power and then do counterrevolution.
I'm sure the first camp exists, but you should not imply that everyone who voted Democrat and wanted people to vote Democrat was that. I did that, and I encourage everyone to criticize their horrible decisions and actions, of which there are depressingly many.
I'd love it if we pressured them to not be quite as horrible, but at the same time I did not want the Republican party to win control because I knew they'd be worse for people in almost every way. And now, as a trans person, I have to worry about what I won't be allowed to do anymore, or how they'll try to make my life worse just for existing. Sending a signal or whatever you think Democrats losing does does not justify the new shit minorities will face now.
Sending a signal or whatever you think Democrats losing does does not justify the new shit minorities will face now.
I just want to point out, that you are making this about me as the rhetorician, when I haven't even weighed in with my position. Its not me you are arguing with when it comes to the application of strategy; its the millions of voters for whom them sacrificing their ideals to get a milquetoast Democrat, pro-genoicde, draconian border policy, democrat into office doesn't work.
This is about a basic understanding of how the table is set, and no amount of willing the environment one finds themselves in changes that. Its like '16 Hillary supporters whining about winning the popular vote. The people who were out their using the argument of "strategic voting" to shield the candidates deeply unpopular positions among democratic voters did real significant harm this election cycle. If your strategy doesn't or can't result in a specific outcome, can we really call it strategic?
My point is that the chiding of voters for not doi
... show more
Sending a signal or whatever you think Democrats losing does does not justify the new shit minorities will face now.
I just want to point out, that you are making this about me as the rhetorician, when I haven't even weighed in with my position. Its not me you are arguing with when it comes to the application of strategy; its the millions of voters for whom them sacrificing their ideals to get a milquetoast Democrat, pro-genoicde, draconian border policy, democrat into office doesn't work.
This is about a basic understanding of how the table is set, and no amount of willing the environment one finds themselves in changes that. Its like '16 Hillary supporters whining about winning the popular vote. The people who were out their using the argument of "strategic voting" to shield the candidates deeply unpopular positions among democratic voters did real significant harm this election cycle. If your strategy doesn't or can't result in a specific outcome, can we really call it strategic?
My point is that the chiding of voters for not doing the job of the candidate is a way of morally washing ones hands of a strategy that genuinely hurt the candidates ability to get elected.
Yeah, I've given some thought to what I'll do in the next election cycle, and I just don't know. I can wish that people would think like me, but I've seen enough evidence from several elections that that's not gonna happen.
That makes me feel a bit hopeless, that we're doomed to the worst politicians winning and ratcheting the US further right, and that I will not be safe to live here for a long time. I know there's organizations I can get involved with, but I really struggle to commit time to anything, and I just feel isolated from everyone (yay social atomization). I think my best bet is giving up the fight and just leaving the country.
Does that give anyone an excuse for helping elect a fascist, racist, xenophobic, physchopath who is in the pocket of a foreign enemy leader by not voting for Kamala?? Fuck no. You're out of your mind.
within the context of federal elections as operated in 2024, it's certainly not the fucking fault of the people who were able to recognize that letting Putin's puppet in the office of the president for a second time to subsequently leave Ukraine to fend for itself and to ensure a genocide in Palestine was the worse of the 2 possible outcomes.
Giving in and voting center left establishment to ensure a win is a much better poison than what we have now. anyone who says otherwise is trying to "morally wash their hands" of the blood that's being spilled in Ukraine and Gaza and domestically.
The people who didn't vote because the DNC chose an establishment dem to replace Biden are narcissistic or stupid.
Trans people, gay people, immigrants
... show more
This is fucking despicable.
We have a 2 party system. Does that suck? Yes.
Should we fight to change it? Yes.
Does that give anyone an excuse for helping elect a fascist, racist, xenophobic, physchopath who is in the pocket of a foreign enemy leader by not voting for Kamala?? Fuck no. You're out of your mind.
within the context of federal elections as operated in 2024, it's certainly not the fucking fault of the people who were able to recognize that letting Putin's puppet in the office of the president for a second time to subsequently leave Ukraine to fend for itself and to ensure a genocide in Palestine was the worse of the 2 possible outcomes.
Giving in and voting center left establishment to ensure a win is a much better poison than what we have now. anyone who says otherwise is trying to "morally wash their hands" of the blood that's being spilled in Ukraine and Gaza and domestically.
The people who didn't vote because the DNC chose an establishment dem to replace Biden are narcissistic or stupid.
Trans people, gay people, immigrants, women, elderly people on social security fixed income, 1000s of workers in industries who will face layoffs in the face of these tariffs, farmers who are losing 2 billion (40% of the food USAID gives out comes from purchases from us farmers) in USAID food purchases per year, children whose education will be forever altered will all be much happier knowing those self righteous progressives stuck to their guns and didn't compromise their morals as they get persecuted under this administration.
WELL FUCKING DONE GUYS. Don't break your arms jacking yourselves off.
You aren't arguing with me. You are arguing with the millions of people who found your rhetoric insufficient and a pro genocide stance unacceptable.
If you want to continue to be the party of "loser Democrats", just keep doing and thinking acting the same way you are presenting yourself in that comment.
When you behaved this way, when this was the rhetoric you used to convince people to vote Democrat, you did real fucking damage, and are in some small way responsible for Trump.
When your "strategy" has the obvious and demonstrated result of the opposite effect to what you want, it's not strategic.
I didn't attack you in my comment did I? Unless you were one of the holdouts... I attacked them directly.
It's like a child who has been poisoned. We have the antidote in our possession but we are arguing because it happens to be a cookie. and one parent is afraid the child will feel rewarded for poisoning itself and the other wants to save the fucking child and deal with everything else after that.
I mean obviously not because you still haven't caught on. Your argument, your approach to electoralism: Its why the Democrats lost. You "won" the argument from the period of January 2024 until November 2024. There are bans here, on lemmy, still in place from those who shared your view and used their power to silence challenging that strategy or narrative. Reddit too. It was ubiquitous across media.
The wages we earned on your behalf because of your complete arrogance and stupidity was Trump. And you are being singled out because you are here, but to be sure, you weren't alone in this hubris. All of mainstream media, almost all but the truly "left of the left" media outlets who were willing to go against the grain and make the obvious case that it wasn't working or going to work: All of them effectively espoused your strategy.
You (and they) wanted to the election to be something other than it was. And you were wrong, and if you were here, I and others probably told you that you were wrong. Some
... show more
The answer is obvious to anyone who can think.
I mean obviously not because you still haven't caught on. Your argument, your approach to electoralism: Its why the Democrats lost. You "won" the argument from the period of January 2024 until November 2024. There are bans here, on lemmy, still in place from those who shared your view and used their power to silence challenging that strategy or narrative. Reddit too. It was ubiquitous across media.
The wages we earned on your behalf because of your complete arrogance and stupidity was Trump. And you are being singled out because you are here, but to be sure, you weren't alone in this hubris. All of mainstream media, almost all but the truly "left of the left" media outlets who were willing to go against the grain and make the obvious case that it wasn't working or going to work: All of them effectively espoused your strategy.
You (and they) wanted to the election to be something other than it was. And you were wrong, and if you were here, I and others probably told you that you were wrong. Some talking heads went onto mainstream media and told them they were wrong (Mehdi Hassan, Sam Seder, a few others). But you all didn't fucking listen and insisted you could just "beat" the electorate into doing what you wanted, like some kind of whipped dog, while the candidate drifted further and further right, towards a non-existent center.
How many votes did you gather to vote for Harris with this approach, that you and effectively all of non-rightwing, mainstream media argued for?
Well we have the receipts. You cost us 6 million votes, or roughly 8% of Biden's 2020 vote count. Pretty much the same number as the number of Democratic voters who voted "uncommitted" as part of the protest vote during the primary, because of Gaza.
You cost us core Democratic voters because you created the permission structure for the campaign to not feel the need to get support from their core Democratic base. You didn't come at this base with rhetoric, you came at them with abuse.
You should feel fucking horrible if this was the way you conducted yourself during the 2024 election cycle, and we'll be blaming BlueMAGA/ Blue-no-matter-who for Trumps victory until the end of time.
I mean obviously not because you still haven't caught on.
To what? The fact that most of my peers in the ultra left are posturing? That they are hypocrites? That they are okay with using thousands of lives as a bargaining chip? No, I'm pretty fucking aware of that at this point.
Your argument, your approach to electoralism: Its why the Democrats lost.
No, the people who were okay protesting the establishment by leaving their peers bleeding in the dirt to prove a point is why trump won. The protester holdouts who want to bitch about people like me holding them accountable and no longer being polite about it can't fucking hold a shred of moral high ground when they refused to use their voice to prevent enormous suffering. I'm convinced that you're a bot at this point.
You "won" the argument from the period of January 2024 until November 2024.
The only winners are the billionaires and ruling class who have successfully pushed rhetoric to polar extremes and have capitalized to insta
... show more
I mean obviously not because you still haven't caught on.
To what? The fact that most of my peers in the ultra left are posturing? That they are hypocrites? That they are okay with using thousands of lives as a bargaining chip? No, I'm pretty fucking aware of that at this point.
Your argument, your approach to electoralism: Its why the Democrats lost.
No, the people who were okay protesting the establishment by leaving their peers bleeding in the dirt to prove a point is why trump won. The protester holdouts who want to bitch about people like me holding them accountable and no longer being polite about it can't fucking hold a shred of moral high ground when they refused to use their voice to prevent enormous suffering. I'm convinced that you're a bot at this point.
You "won" the argument from the period of January 2024 until November 2024.
The only winners are the billionaires and ruling class who have successfully pushed rhetoric to polar extremes and have capitalized to install puppets and purchased politicians.
There are bans here, on lemmy, still in place from those who shared your view and used their power to silence challenging that strategy or narrative. Reddit too. It was ubiquitous across media.
Silencing dissenting view points isn't useful, don't lump me in with people who can and care to do that just because I'm pissed off. I'm not silencing anyone.
The wages we earned on your behalf because of your complete arrogance and stupidity was Trump.
Not on my behalf lol I actually voted why can't you remember that???
And you are being singled out because you are here, but to be sure, you weren't alone in this hubris.
Hubris. Wow
Imagine saying that the person in this argument who was capable of conceding to reality, dispite vehemently disagreeing with the options, and voting for Kamala....trying ensure the lesser of two evils gets into office to save other people's lives, is the one displaying hubris....rather than the person who is defending not voting to prevent the suffering....this is actual insanity, ill say it again, I actually voted. You're defending people who didn't.
What a place of privilege the protest non voters are in. They sleep at night with no risk of being bombed by Israel or Russia.
You're conflating me with some Washington DC pundit who talks down to silly little college kids who have hope. The problem is that guy happened to be right this time.
The stakes were insanely high. We had the data. We saw how bad trump was the first time with no preparation or support. and we knew that he had way more organization behind him this time.
“Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject.”
All of mainstream media, almost all but the truly "left of the left" media outlets who were willing to go against the grain and make the obvious case that it wasn't working or going to work: All of them effectively espoused your strategy.
Yeah because it's crazy that people think it's okay to gamble with someone as dangerous as Trump. Normal people with a soul understood this instinctually.
Of course the media tried to tell people that this is not the time to make a well intentioned, but morally incorrect decision to not vote.
What's your fucking point
You (and they) wanted to the election to be something other than it was.
Obviously. aoc, Bernie, Jon stewart....hell, a rock.
And you were wrong,
I know, I can't believe how many people actually were willing to condemn others because they were mad at the DNC.
and if you were here, I and others probably told you that you were wrong.
Oh yeah I argued till I was blue in the face with trolls and bots and hypocrites and everyone else.
Some talking heads went onto mainstream media and told them they were wrong (Mehdi Hassan, Sam Seder, a few others).
It makes sense that people more in touch with the far left like Sam would try and tell left leaning MSM that their is a grass roots coalition of protesters growing.
But you all didn't fucking listen and insisted you could just "beat" the electorate into doing what you wanted, like some kind of whipped dog, while the candidate drifted further and further right, towards a non-existent center.
Who is you all?? Lol
It's so clear that people on the left can't be held to a consistent moral code after watching this unfold. It's disheartening honestly. You're right, no amount of appealing to their humanity and doing quikmaffs mattered because "Democrats bad, I'll show them."
But I stand by everything. These people have blood on their hands over something that is petty and trivial in comparison. They wanted to make a stand against policies that were hurting immigrants and Palestinians so they helped elect trump by standing aside so he could turn Gaza into a resort and deport immigrants to Guantanamo. its hypocrisy, it's cruel, it's unforgivable.
How many votes did you gather to vote for Harris with this approach, that you and effectively all of non-rightwing, mainstream media argued for?
Hard to say, but don't forget that all the Islamic Arabic community leaders in places like Michigan published letters laying out how important it was to not let trump win. People were trying once it was apparent there was a rift dangerous enough to lose it all.
Well we have the receipts. You cost us 6 million votes, or roughly 8% of Biden's 2020 vote count. Pretty much the same number as the number of Democratic voters who voted "uncommitted" as part of the protest vote during the primary, because of Gaza.
By doing what exactly? Telling people to vote who already made their intentions known by not voting in primaries by using logical arguments to explain how those actions will hurt people worse that they claim to want to save? That's what made people not vote in the general election?? They already didn't once and Kamala was already picked.
You cost us core Democratic voters because you created the permission structure for the campaign to not feel the need to get support from their core Democratic base.
I didn't do that, they made the choice! youre victim blaming the non voters. That's abuser logic.
LOOK WHAT YOU MADE ME NOT DO!! YOU MADE ME STAY HOME ON ELECTION DAY BY POINTING OUT THAT LESS PEOPLE WILL COME TO HARM IF I VOTE FOR THE PERSON ENDORSED BY THE ESTABLISHMENT CENTER DEMS.
What are you even talking about....
And it's a nonstarter anyway because the calculus is about trying to save people. This was a multiple choice test. There was only 1 right answer for that and people chose incorrectly for personal reasons.
And furthermore, your position depends on a static position across infinite time. AFTER Kamala would've been elected you can reapply pressure.
Protest in all the ways we can muster and guess what??? That hypothetical president is more receptive to protests and doesn't tweet shit about throwing them all in jail for wearing black masks on college campuses....
You didn't come at this base with rhetoric, you came at them with abuse.
COGENT LOGICAL ARGUMENTS ARE ABUSE NOW, WE ARE COOKED CHAT
You should feel fucking horrible if this was the way you conducted yourself during the 2024 election cycle, and we'll be blaming BlueMAGA/ Blue-no-matter-who for Trumps victory until the end of time.
You're fucking disgusting. It would be funny if people weren't dying because of this. Your telling people who fought to minimize harm during a watershed moment for our country that they are the ones who should feel bad? Your head is so beyond fucked.
Also I'm a Bernie voter, Democratic socialist/Marxist soooooo miss me with that blue maga shit.
Would you rather "be right", in the sense of your rhetorical and applied framing, or have Harris win the election?
You have to pick. Because you won the argument on how to approach the issue, at least for period of almost all of the period of 2024 that mattered. The world agreed with you. Your world view was precisely how almost all talking heads on addressed the issue. That voters needed to get over it. That voters needed to "vote strategically".
But it lost us the election. You won the round to lose the match. The hubris is you blaming anyone but yourself.
You have a choice. You can continue to "be right", in your mind, about how to approach rhetoric and electoralism, but you will not win elections.
Alternatively, you can change your mind, and reproach your strategy in terms of what it takes to win elections, both in rhetoric and approach to electoralism.
Maybe democrats want to lose. Why else would they not invite 3rd parties to participate of equal footing. Why would they say no to multiple chances at beating the republicans? Why would they say no to increased voter participation and the free votes that come along side that.
Where is the urgency during the election? Where is the urgency now? Do they not believe what they've been saying about the republicans this whole time?
3rd parties cannibalize votes from which ever majority party it aligns closest with. That's the problem with our system. Your comment makes no sense I'm the context of current voting rules.
Ranked choice voting would help immensely and then your tongue in cheek rhetorical questions would make sense, but until then the answer is obvious. The Dems don't want that because it takes votes from them.
I swallowed my misgivings and voted Democrat, just like I've done at each election since I turned 18, but handwaving away valid criticisms is not how you get people to side with you. Pressure needs to be put on the democrats to be better, too.
I'm 100% for valid criticisms—I don't even consider myself a Democrat and I have no compunctions about criticizing them when I think they are wrong. But I'm pretty sure that meme is directed at those who withheld their vote.
It would be in theory, but mostly it's just spread around as how any protest against Israel cost the democrats the US election (despite how it was considered widely unpopular to support Israel's genocide by most democrats).
Then maybe Harris and her team should have listened to some feedback about their widely unpopular stance that seemed to somewhat equate them with the Republicans during an election which they absolutely couldn't afford to be seen as remotely similar to republicans.
Democrats are pragmatically there for the money. They aren't comically evil, but they are corrupt. They will throw an election before they ever give up AIPAC money and count on the next election swinging back to them. They get to sit back and watch the republicans be the bad guys and stir shit up for a few years. Then, when they get back in power, they fix the things that's don't make them money and look like he good guys but conveniently leave the unpopular policy the republicans enacted that makes them money and they don't have to look like the bad guys. They just look incompetent. But they aren't. This is all very purposeful. They love this dynamic. They benifit from it.
The democrats as they are for sure need to go. But we need to be more pragmatic ourselves about removing them instead of throwing elections to the republicans hoping it will teach the Democrats a lesson. Because it won't. We need to focus on getting a foothold and changing the party. And that means turning out to vote in every election no matter what. Vote third party. Vote write in. Vote whatever. But si
... show more
Democrats are pragmatically there for the money. They aren't comically evil, but they are corrupt. They will throw an election before they ever give up AIPAC money and count on the next election swinging back to them. They get to sit back and watch the republicans be the bad guys and stir shit up for a few years. Then, when they get back in power, they fix the things that's don't make them money and look like he good guys but conveniently leave the unpopular policy the republicans enacted that makes them money and they don't have to look like the bad guys. They just look incompetent. But they aren't. This is all very purposeful. They love this dynamic. They benifit from it.
The democrats as they are for sure need to go. But we need to be more pragmatic ourselves about removing them instead of throwing elections to the republicans hoping it will teach the Democrats a lesson. Because it won't. We need to focus on getting a foothold and changing the party. And that means turning out to vote in every election no matter what. Vote third party. Vote write in. Vote whatever. But sitting out of elections to teach democrats a lesson just isn't going to do anything. It's just throwing away the small amount of political capital most people have. If we don't vote now its either corporate feudalism or civil war in the future.
Yeah I think they've realized over the decades that the needle swings like a metronome whether they try or not, especially thanks to obstructionists like Mitch McConnell ensuring trying won't go anywhere.
So they cash their paycheck, occasionally show up for votes, and play the stock market with knowledge they gain from privileged information.
I don't think so. Not that I have anything better to offer. My wife thinks Biden would've won because too many people stayed home, refusing to vote for a black woman. I, frankly, think the election was about the economy. If you look back over the elections, they are almost always about how people are doing financially. If they are scared or hurting, they will vote for change. If they are happy, they vote for the incumbent. My honest opinion is that there wasn't a scenario or candidate that would've changed Trump's victory.
What I am sure of is that in all of the states where Trump won (even Michigan), if every single person who withheld their vote due to Israel/Gaza had voted for Kamala, that wouldn't have been enough by itself to change the outcome. Certainly, that issue had an effect, but it didn't change the outcome by itself. We have to look beyond that.
But, still, if you did withhold your vote thinking you were fighting for Gaza, yeah I think you deserve to have your nose rubbed in that shit.
No, they were never going to do that. They've already said that they learned their lesson, and in 2026, they're gonna double down on the losing strategy that they've been running since Clinton was in office and run on building the wall on the Mexican border and deporting immigrants to court the moderate Republican vote that doesn't exist and never would vote for them even if it did.
By the Presidential election, it's already years too late to force them to actually do good things. Protest votes and withholding your vote have done nothing to stop the slide that led to Harris campaigning with Liz Cheney in tow in the 16 years that I've been voting. If you want change, it's only going to come by threatening the position of the people in charge of the party and replacing the old guard with people like AOC. Whoever gets elected President does neither of those things. Unless Krasnov declares the Democratic Party a terrorist organization and has them all arrested as political prisoners. But then we won't have to worry about voting ever again, just like he promised.
Firstly, we can dismiss the notion that the candidate can't be moved. The citation for that is Biden in 2020, who effectively campaigned during the primary as a moderate Republican, and until the southern states which we're never going to go blue anyways weighed in, was getting his ass handed to him. The Sunday before Super Tuesday, the rat-fuckening, Oblivious Warren. All that old history.
And then something remarkable happened. Biden opened the doors to the tent and invited the progressive wing of the party in. He handed the Bernie-crats the platform and said "have at it hoss". And it worked. Instead of disenfranchising the activist base, he embraced them, or at least, extended an olive branch by giving them the platform, without which he assuredly would have lost.
So: Candidates can be moved.
Second:
By the Presidential election, it’s already years too late to force them to actually do good things. Protest votes and withholding your vote have done nothing to stop the slide that led to Harris campaigning with Liz Che
... show more
A few things.
Firstly, we can dismiss the notion that the candidate can't be moved. The citation for that is Biden in 2020, who effectively campaigned during the primary as a moderate Republican, and until the southern states which we're never going to go blue anyways weighed in, was getting his ass handed to him. The Sunday before Super Tuesday, the rat-fuckening, Oblivious Warren. All that old history.
And then something remarkable happened. Biden opened the doors to the tent and invited the progressive wing of the party in. He handed the Bernie-crats the platform and said "have at it hoss". And it worked. Instead of disenfranchising the activist base, he embraced them, or at least, extended an olive branch by giving them the platform, without which he assuredly would have lost.
So: Candidates can be moved.
Second:
By the Presidential election, it’s already years too late to force them to actually do good things. Protest votes and withholding your vote have done nothing to stop the slide that led to Harris campaigning with Liz Cheney in tow in the 16 years that I’ve been voting.
Again. And I'm singling you out because you responded and well, here we are. This is an obtuse, bordering on bad faith interpretation of the argument being made. You aren't arguing with me. You are arguing with the millions of voters who stayed home for Kamala but showed up for Biden. And you moralizing about an objectively misguided application of strategic voting didn't/ doesn't/ won't/ change their votes. When your "strategic voting" strategy results in losing you the election, explain to me how and why its strategic?
You don't/ can't move millions of voters to a new position. Or at least it hasn't been shown to be possible (2016, 2024). Asking voters to "vote against" instead of "voting for" doesn't work and we now have so many receipts, that they will write text books on the matter. What can be done, is that the candidate can be moved. Its also been shown through an evidentiary process to work.
To summarize, candidates can be moved. Biden moved and won an election because of it. When you moralize about your own, demonstrated-to-be-wrong conception of strategic voting, you aren't arguing with me, you are arguing with the literally millions of people left on the table by the Democrats. A strategy that when examined before hand will clearly lose, the insistence of then implementing it becomes a "burn the world down" moralization to wash your own hands: Democratic voters who reliably show up, but did not, because the DNC got a hall pass from those making the exact arguments you are making here. They did not need to respond to criticism because this argument you are making shielded them. And it cost us all, practically everything.
Further evidence that the democrats can be moved if we don't let them maintain the delusion they can win while trying to be republicans: The entire party told Biden to drop out when it was clear he had no path to victory.
Sadly Kamala was allowed to believe she could win while embracing the same policies and messaging that killed the Biden campaign. Instead of screaming at the party to campaign on overwhelmingly popular left policy necessary to win the election and use every power at the democrat's disposal to accomplish it, blue MAGA told anyone pointing out that we're headed back towards the waterfall to shut up and paddle harder.
But I spent a lot of time ringing any alarm bell I could find that all of Joe and Kamal's moves to the right was gonna cost us the election, and that the victory fund would lose the House and Senate.
I was right on all counts, but the people I was trying to explain it won't admit that reality proved them wrong.
There's no criticism for what the party did wrong, only anger at anyone with higher standards than the letter by the name.
Neoliberals want nothing as much as they want blindly loyal Dem voters, it's the only way most people ever hold their noses and vote for one. But rather than have a candidate dem voters want, they'd rather risk trump.
When they shut on voters like in that meme, they're telling us they have zero problem watching the country burn. They'd rather have trump than a Dem who agrees with Dem voters.
Yep. Every time they've pulled farther right and lost, they've blamed the leftists for it for being too extremist in their policy demands or claiming that their issues aren't as important, like in the case with Millennials and housing costs, student debt, climate change, etc. Despite trying to make some headway on those issues, they've always refused to campaign on them.
If you look carefully, you'll find statements about how "neither option affects [this particular thing] but we have the best chance of fixing it after the election if we still have a country".
It was never handwaved. It was the least-worse option with some kind of hope given that issue and a thousand others. How many times this has fucking been fucking explained and not fucking understood.
Uh yes it was definitely hand-waved away by some "if you look carefully". It was only the "least-worse option" because so many were successfully manipulated by the system into being placated with crumbs so they wouldn't revolt at the thousands of other reasons we've had for years to fight back against this shit, pushing the Overton window to the right in increments and leading folks to not use or even possess or be taught in the first place the critical thinking skills required to inform oneself and take steps to make positive change, in this system designed to intentionally misinform and mislead us and pit us against each other so we vote for the same rich white men responsible for perpetuating this system and the harm it brings to all of us, especially marginalized communities.
I would recommend to you (and anyone who is interested in informing themselves on what is being done to us) to read "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein. It details this process of incremental change, and some of the strategies and parties previously and currently involved in taking control of our go
... show more
Uh yes it was definitely hand-waved away by some "if you look carefully". It was only the "least-worse option" because so many were successfully manipulated by the system into being placated with crumbs so they wouldn't revolt at the thousands of other reasons we've had for years to fight back against this shit, pushing the Overton window to the right in increments and leading folks to not use or even possess or be taught in the first place the critical thinking skills required to inform oneself and take steps to make positive change, in this system designed to intentionally misinform and mislead us and pit us against each other so we vote for the same rich white men responsible for perpetuating this system and the harm it brings to all of us, especially marginalized communities.
I would recommend to you (and anyone who is interested in informing themselves on what is being done to us) to read "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein. It details this process of incremental change, and some of the strategies and parties previously and currently involved in taking control of our government (or at this point more like what's left of it).
(For clarity: I'm not saying both parties are the same, although their goals, tactics, and policies seem less different to me as time passes; I'm not making any general statement passing blame to any group of voters or non-voters in this comment, because I believe the bulk of the responsibility lies on the system and those who hold sway over large parts of it in the form of currency or legislation, for example; I'm not denying or invalidating that you may feel this way and/or believe it is true, I'm taking issue with your statement that "it was never handwaved", because I most certainly saw that happen and know people who to this day are clinging to that sentiment; I'm not saying harm reduction isn't the move or good policy, it is but there has to simultaneously be work being done on reducing or removing the source of that harm)
Edit: sorry for run-on sentences. working on it gradually and open to feedback
Pressure needs to be put on the democrats to be better, too.
They're already 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000x better than Republicans. So someone would have to be pretty goddamn stupid not to vote for them when the options are them or Republicans.
The majority of the fault isn't on Democrats. It's on goddamn stupid braindead asshole American voters for being goddamn stupid braindead assholes.
I'd like to believe you're right, but given who won the election I'm forced to disagree - hand-waiving away valid criticisms, along with all responsibilities of all kinds, while making the most wildly invalid criticisms of others seems to be a great way to win elections.
This isn't just being pedantic. If you just say democrats have to address all valid concerns, it's putting them at a political disadvantage because some valid concerns can't be addressed without losing. Democrats are in a tough spot anytime there's a crisis in Israel because Muslims and Jews both vote democrat when they're not pissed off. Both groups heavily shifted towards Trump this election. Because both groups contain large numbers of people who, like other people, tend to be shockingly bad at doing what's rational when they're having emotions.
Point is, as much as Kamala failed to stop Trump and that falls on her, cut her some slack on the Israel-Palestine thing because it's hard being attacked from all sides by emotional zombies who won't listen to reason. There's no right decisions to be made.
Will you still be saying that when Trump puts a resort in Gaza?
Yes. Will you refuse to demand electoral reform in your state so the people of this nation can vote outside the two party system without a spoiler effect? Will you refuse to do anything about those who are without representation? Will you refuse democracy?
So according to you, the palestinians voted for trump and therefore deserve to be genocided???
Tell me, how exactly would arab and palestinian people have been able to vote for trump? And why would they do that?
Of course you dont have proof either because votes are secret, so, because you suspect some palestinians of voting for trump you want them all genocided???
I'm not American so nobody got my vote, but seems to me like the issue is with the swathes of people choosing facism rather than progressives who chose not to vote.
Choosing how to act in a world like ours is tricky, anyone following a sense of right and wrong (even if I disagree with their judgement) instead of fear, hate, greed or whatever gets a gold star in my book.
Inaction is still a choice, though. I totally understand the sentiment behind that choice and even agree that we shouldn't be forced to choose genocide, but the alternative that we got is a man who not only wants the same genocide, but wants to accelerate it, put American boots on the ground to assist in it, and then turn the bloodied ground into resorts while also wanting to worsen life across the globe. So, by refusing to act, they didn't oppose that man getting into power. They cared so much about genocide that, ironically, they enabled making that genocide worse by not acting against that possibility.
The biggest issue, though, is with the people who couldn't be bothered enough to vote. Some, what, 40% of Americans never vote? Of course, there's plenty there who can't due to things like gerrymandering, but there's a huge swathe of white suburbanites who simply prefer the status quo to actually improving things.
But thanks to the two party system, what effect does it have? And I'm specifically talking about the voting day of the presidential election here, not primaries or other elections. Because that's where those efforts will have the most impact. Not that the Dems deigned to give us even the illusion of a primary this election (or in 2016, truthfully), but so many of these people seem to shake their fist once every 4 years and then go to sleep like cicadas awaiting the next presidential election.
I don't blame people for hating the weak candidates that the Dems consistently push forward to maintain the old guards' leadership positions, but I do blame them for looking at the alternative and saying "I'm okay with the possibility of that man winning if I don't vote or vote third party." The chance of a Trump victory and all that it entailed was a line in the sand that they were willing to cross.
As a trans woman, I blame them for saying, "Your life is not worth biting the bullet for."
Yet refusing to accept the reality of mathematics that showed that, in a FPTP system, not voting for a viable candidate opposing a fascist only helps the fascist is acceptable? Nah. The blood is on the hands of both dems and non-voters. Non-voters/protest voters don't give a fuck about trans people, as shown by their actions.
3 of them are known to support a fascist and will vote, no matter what. They have religious figures reminding them and pressuring them to vote for the fascist and watch propaganda daily that maintains their outrage and support.
1 of them is a big supporter of the neolibs and will vote for them no matter what.
1 of them is a pragmatic leftist who grudgingly will vote for the neolibs because there is no other viable choice.
1 of them is undecided either because they don't think fascism is that bad, or think it won't impact them, or don't consider how it could impact people who are not as privileged as them, etc.
The other 4 are:
2 who are too filled with apathy to care about voting
1 who the fascists keep setting up artificial barriers for in order to prevent political engagement
1 who is thoroughly indoctrinated in the cult of anti-electoralism
That's 6/10 eligible voting (in line with the proportion of eligible voters that voted in 2024).
Further, histo
... show more
Suppose there are 10 people eligible to vote.
3 of them are known to support a fascist and will vote, no matter what. They have religious figures reminding them and pressuring them to vote for the fascist and watch propaganda daily that maintains their outrage and support.
1 of them is a big supporter of the neolibs and will vote for them no matter what.
1 of them is a pragmatic leftist who grudgingly will vote for the neolibs because there is no other viable choice.
1 of them is undecided either because they don't think fascism is that bad, or think it won't impact them, or don't consider how it could impact people who are not as privileged as them, etc.
The other 4 are:
2 who are too filled with apathy to care about voting
1 who the fascists keep setting up artificial barriers for in order to prevent political engagement
1 who is thoroughly indoctrinated in the cult of anti-electoralism
That's 6/10 eligible voting (in line with the proportion of eligible voters that voted in 2024).
Further, historical data shows that when fewer people vote, the fascists win because of their dedication to their cause and authority figures coaxing them to do so. This data is readily available in terms that are easy to comprehend, even for those without technical or scientific education.
So, the breakdown is:
Fascism: 3
Neolibs: 2 or 3
Coin toss on whether the fascists win, because, of those deigning to engage in the electoral system, one of them is not convinced that opposing fascism is really that big of a deal.
What about third parties? They don't matter in this but because it is first-past-the-post and only a majority of participating voters is required.
But, the majority of polled people support left-of-center policies! Why are we forced to vote for neolibs?! Doesn't matter. 4 out of 10 eligible voters are going to vote in support of right-of-center ideologies. If more eligible voters voted, that wouldn't be an issue and the voice of the majority would be heard. But, between apathy, voter suppression, and the anti-electoralist/accelerationist cult, 40% are not voting. And that's still "good" compared to the last half-century.
So, there you go. Barely even scratching statistics and simple to digest as to why voters who refused to do their duty to oppose fascism share the responsibility with the neolibs.
It is vitally important, not just in elections but also in life overall, to recognize that not all possibilities are equally likely and to use available data to evaluate them.
For example, it is possible that a white rhinoceros might come down the hall and join me for a spot of tea and biscuits. I can, however, safely say that that is almost definitely not going to happen, based upon these data points:
I do not keep any white rhinoceros in my home.
White rhinoceros are not native to this continent and are classified as near-threatened (a major improvement from their previous near-extinction).
White rhinoceros average between 1700kg and 2300kg. My home was not designed and built to support that kind of moving mass. Any white rhinoceros walking down my hall would likely fall through the floor.
White rhinoceros, while generally docile and gregarious, are not known for enjoying tea and biscuits.
Yes, this is a exaggerated caricature. However, data with even more clarity is available surrounding election outcomes. Betting on
... show more
It is vitally important, not just in elections but also in life overall, to recognize that not all possibilities are equally likely and to use available data to evaluate them.
For example, it is possible that a white rhinoceros might come down the hall and join me for a spot of tea and biscuits. I can, however, safely say that that is almost definitely not going to happen, based upon these data points:
I do not keep any white rhinoceros in my home.
White rhinoceros are not native to this continent and are classified as near-threatened (a major improvement from their previous near-extinction).
White rhinoceros average between 1700kg and 2300kg. My home was not designed and built to support that kind of moving mass. Any white rhinoceros walking down my hall would likely fall through the floor.
White rhinoceros, while generally docile and gregarious, are not known for enjoying tea and biscuits.
Yes, this is a exaggerated caricature. However, data with even more clarity is available surrounding election outcomes. Betting on a possible outcome without any evidence to suggest that it is likely is foolish and betting on an outcome that one knows is unlikely, while increasing the likelihood of an outcome known to be harmful to vulnerable people is detestable.
Knowingly putting others lives at risk by refusing to do what is literally the least one can do, that is, voting in a strategic manner to prevent literal fascists who have repeatedly taken action against LGBTQ+ and made statements in support of committing genocide against them, POC, and people who are neurodivergent and/or impacted by mental illness is not what an ally does. It is an action that demonstrates that the non-voter/protest voter does not find vulnerable peoples' lives important enough to warrant the effort needed to climb down off of their pedestal of egotistical moral superiority to do meaningfully lend support to their fellow human beings' right to exist.
And the Log Cabin Republicans exist. And the Association of German National Jews existed. Thinking that one is special enough to not be subjected to the oppression that others will face just shows that they are ignorant of history in addition to the betrayal.
So it seems like you fully understand the flaws of First past the post voting. Have you done anything to fix it? Are the democrats doing anything to fix it? Nows the time. Not during the election
Have you done anything to fix it? Yes. I've supported efforts for electrical reform both locally and nationality.
Are the democrats doing anything to fix it? The leadership of a primarily neo-liberal party that likes the status quo and sees little opposition from the left in primaries? No, I don't think they currently are.
Nows the time. Not during the election.
Here, we have some agreement and common ground. Now is indeed a much better time to try for change than a general election. However, with fascists in power, free elections are likely to no longer occur for the foreseeable future. So, demanding resistance from elected officials and building community is vital to weathering this storm that was avoidable.
Now. I see that you have not responded to my request for what you have done, after my response to your accusatory question. Care to do so? Or are you just JAQing it?
The biggest issue, though, is with the people who couldn’t be bothered enough to vote. Some, what, 40% of Americans never vote?
Sounds like First-past-the-post voting doesn't properly represent the population. Let's try a new electoral system to fix this. The people of Alaska switched to Ranked Choice and they had a referendum last election to go back to FPTP voting, and they didn't want to.
I absolutely agree, though I know of at least one other place that tried it and had issues because nobody knew who the candidates were or what their positions were, but IIRC, there was some context to it that made it a "well, of course they had problems" situation instead of people just being too lazy to read up on the candidates (though that is a very real but solvable issue). Like there were 10 districts on the ballot with 6 open seats in each, and they had about 30 candidates per district or something crazy like that.
I feel a lot of people do a lot to justify stupid behaviour. "Saving is too hard" or "exercise is too hard". There's legit reasons to not be able to save, or exercise or being able to vote 🤨.
However there's a lot of bullshit that people were spouting. It's either a coordinated campaign or just dumb shit. What annoys me is everyone piling on Joe and then they did what people wanted and swapped to Kamala and they're still upset that the Dems "don't listen". Whatever, they're all full of it.
I fucking hate the Democrats but you have to be completely psycho to justify not-voting for them.
To be clear, I'm Canadian and I'm directly impacted by this now. So fuck all of those people.
While I did vote blue conservative (for the last time), they were not worthy of that vote because they did not represent me. That's how representative democracy works. What you advocate for is not representative democracy, it is a hostage situation and should be treated like the crisis that that entails.
Why are you okay with people being underrepresented at the voting booth? Are you actively working to replace First Past the Post voting in your state? People should have the freedom to vote for the candidates they believe are best, while still ensuring their votes count against those they don’t want in office.
It's not as though democrats are just now learning of the mathematical flaws of FPTP. Every election I've seen the same bullshit excuses to take people's inalienable right to vote how they want. Democrats in blue states made a choice to leave a huge portion of the population unrepresented, all for safe states and easy elections.
We don’t need to wait for a miracle from Congress, we can pass election reform one state at a time. Should we have mor
... show more
While I did vote blue conservative (for the last time), they were not worthy of that vote because they did not represent me. That's how representative democracy works. What you advocate for is not representative democracy, it is a hostage situation and should be treated like the crisis that that entails.
Why are you okay with people being underrepresented at the voting booth? Are you actively working to replace First Past the Post voting in your state? People should have the freedom to vote for the candidates they believe are best, while still ensuring their votes count against those they don’t want in office.
It's not as though democrats are just now learning of the mathematical flaws of FPTP. Every election I've seen the same bullshit excuses to take people's inalienable right to vote how they want. Democrats in blue states made a choice to leave a huge portion of the population unrepresented, all for safe states and easy elections.
We don’t need to wait for a miracle from Congress, we can pass election reform one state at a time. Should we have more elections, we must remove the democratic monopoly on this fight against the republicans. Don't worry, blue conservative, you will be free to vote for your preference under a more representative electoral system. Because who would want to deny someone the right to vote for the person they feel is best? You apparently.
Alaska has already abolished FPTP voting. After Ranked Choice Voting kept Sarah Palin out of office, Alaskan Republicans tried to pass a referendum to revert to FPTP, but the people voted to keep Ranked Choice. Why would you want to use the same voting system that Republicans favor? Do you support democracy, or do you get off on forcing people unrepresented in government to vote for your preference?
science meme? ok, i'll bite. fuck this indeed, imagine being Jewish in the past year, and being harassed and bullied from the "from the river to the sea" folks on campus, made to feel unsafe and targeted, not because you're Israeli, but simply because you're Jewish, and when you complain, being met with feckless and indignant school administration saying "free speech bro". broken clock right twice a day, and all that. time to make American Jihadis, and the nihilist leftists that support them, think twice, about what it's going to cost them to continue to terrorize Jews. this all could have been self policed, limits placed internally at just how far and how intense the "protests" were allowed to become, but it was an orgy of Antisemitism, and now, at least this Jew, is glad the hammer is coming down, though I wish it were from someone else, i'm glad for it just the same
I mean, fuck antisemitism in any form, obviously...
...but I'm going to say "allow fascists to eliminate freedom of protest" has a spotty track record improving that particular issue.
This guy is in power in no small part due to whatever definition for not-fascist Americans you want to use not showing up because they feel compromise is beneath them. Maybe it's time to learn that lesson.
Well, no, the time to learn that lesson was November. I guess it's finding out time. For people too rightfully indignant about the genocide in Gaza to look past their own noses and to people in your situation alike, I'm afraid.
"We should repeal the First Amendment because I don't like it when protestors support Palestine."
It's hard to take your claims seriously when you have a history of twisting and misinterpreting any pro-Palestine anything as if it was a personal attack directly at you.
Mod reminder to keep it civil and no personal attacks when you reply to this. This person has had bad experiences, remember the human. Please report any personal attacks.
PS: Remember, if you want to convince people you need to meet them where they are. This person is your neighbor, not your enemy.
Sometimes couched as anti-Israel, we find supporters of discrimination in their spheres of influence, including Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), spouting prejudices with hubris while their party’s leadership, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, remain mostly silent.
German Jews recognize they safely exist only through police protection, who park outside German synagogues to prevent anti-Semitic violence. In Poland, the home of Auschwitz, anti-Semitism has become so accepted it blatantly is part of the platform of the National Democratic Party, known as “Endeks.”
And they assert this bit of history as evidence:
From 1921 to 1935, there was a group named the Association of German National Jews (Verban
... show more
This position is interesting. It's echoed in articles like:
Sometimes couched as anti-Israel, we find supporters of discrimination in their spheres of influence, including Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), spouting prejudices with hubris while their party’s leadership, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, remain mostly silent.
German Jews recognize they safely exist only through police protection, who park outside German synagogues to prevent anti-Semitic violence. In Poland, the home of Auschwitz, anti-Semitism has become so accepted it blatantly is part of the platform of the National Democratic Party, known as “Endeks.”
And they assert this bit of history as evidence:
From 1921 to 1935, there was a group named the Association of German National Jews (Verband national Deutsche Juden), whose goal was the total assimilation of Jews into German culture; the self-eradication of Jewish identity; the expulsion of all Eastern European Jews from Germany; and a radical hatred of Zionism. Sadly, these seem like the same goals of many Jews in America choosing to deny the faith and practices of their ancestors in favor of secularizing themselves. On some level — often unconscious — they believe if they deny their Judaism and go along with the anti-Semitic rhetoric, non-Jewish Americans will better accept them. Unfortunately, they are avoiding looking at history.
To me, it sounds like the argument is being framed as "us" Jews and "them" Jews making the mistake of trying to homogenize. That's tremendously ironic, as this type of thinking is exactly what led them to support Nazi Germany. The exact kind of language Trump use, aggressive, bombastic pursuit of "agitators" as undesirables, of ignoring antisemites and bigots Trump associates himself with, of dismissing his speech as a "rhetorical tool," is what German Jewish groups believed would protect them... Until Nazis came for them, too.
Maybe antisemetic violence should be curbed, but you should consider what's actually causing it, and how that "curbing" will be done.
There is no question anti-Semitism is on the rise internationally at a level not seen in decades. Sometimes couched as anti-Israel, we find supporters of
"The Jews are the cause of Antisemitism" yes, how novel, why didn't anyone else think of that, oh, that's right, literally every other band of Antisemites throughout all time have used that line of reasoning,"why can't the Jews, you know, be less Jewish, we are absolutely within our rights to terrorize them until they see the light". "Maybe antisemitic violence should be curbed" "Maybe". Quite.
I'm sure it must be a stressful time for Jewish people. All hate crime is horrible. Many people, Jewish and non-Jewish, oppose the actions of Israel.
I do hope the protests, to stop US arms being sent to Israel, grow in strength. And I do what I can personally to help.
When looking at the numbers its no exaggeration to say that the Palestinian people are being slaughtered by the Israel military. - On October 7, 2023 Israel was attacked killing 1200 Israelis. Israel's response to the attack has been completely disproportionate and has now (as of June 2024) killed over 7,797 children. In the same time the conflict killed 53 children in Israel. - The most conservative estimate is that 7,797 Palestinian children have been killed, in the same time it is estimated that the total Israeli casualties; including military and civilian, including men, women, and children is 1200. - on April 24, 2024 with many thousands of Palestinian children already dead, the US gave 14 billion in aid to Israel - Neither US political party is stopping this.
Here are my sources,
... show more
I'm sure it must be a stressful time for Jewish people. All hate crime is horrible. Many people, Jewish and non-Jewish, oppose the actions of Israel.
I do hope the protests, to stop US arms being sent to Israel, grow in strength. And I do what I can personally to help.
When looking at the numbers its no exaggeration to say that the Palestinian people are being slaughtered by the Israel military. - On October 7, 2023 Israel was attacked killing 1200 Israelis. Israel's response to the attack has been completely disproportionate and has now (as of June 2024) killed over 7,797 children. In the same time the conflict killed 53 children in Israel. - The most conservative estimate is that 7,797 Palestinian children have been killed, in the same time it is estimated that the total Israeli casualties; including military and civilian, including men, women, and children is 1200. - on April 24, 2024 with many thousands of Palestinian children already dead, the US gave 14 billion in aid to Israel - Neither US political party is stopping this.
Here are my sources, I am always interested to have other sources.
I tried to pick from a range of sources and tried to include any statistic that made my argument weakest. Most of the numbers come from June to August of 2024.
How many of the Palestinian deaths were civilians? Many articles state that most of the Palestinian death records don't include combatant/non-combatant designations. The most common statistic given in this context is deaths of women and children. of those killed 58 to 48% were women and children jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/art… of 24,686 identified casualties: 7,797 children (32%), 4,959 women (20%), 1,924 elderly (8%) unocha.org/publications/report… Netanyahu said "probably around 16,000 civilians have been killed" politifact.com/article/2024/ma…
Friendly reminder that Trump refused to condemn a group of white supremacists chanting "Jews will not replace us".
He is not on your side. And, if history is any indication, allowing government to control speech and expression by fascist means is much more dangerous to Jews than any group of student protesters could ever be.
This exactly. Higher education hurts them in the long run so it was never going to get a pass. It’ll be gutted so that private schools can take over. This is just a way to put the blame on the universities and students who don’t bend to their will.
Also, read up on what they are ultimately going for: Eliminating the First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Trump supporters: "that's fine, the president isn't congress"
Don't worry! Once the people who Defend the Constitution after SCORES OF 6 YEAR OLDS GET MOWED DOWN BY A GUNMAN hear about this they'll be PISSED and Take Action!
"Such a splendid sunny day, and I have to go. But how many have to die on the battlefield in these days, how many young, promising lives... What does my death matter if by our acts thousands are warned and alerted. Among the student body there will certainly be a revolt."
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
1st ammendment to the constitution since conservatives love to claim they support it
Yeah but they're gonna rewrite the constitution, it's gonna be the best constitution the founding fathers will be jealous they didn't come up with this thing it's gonna be airtight and on the blockchain
Congress isn't making a law. Instead, the President is committing treason while his party pretends not to notice and the other party flops around like a dead fish.
We have a ton of money, a ton of military installations, and 1 in 8 Americans IS a Californian. Washington and Oregon join us, and we'd be in even better shape. Canada can get in on the action too.
A felon rapist traitor and his traitor party is making our Constitution irrelevant. Time to start looking out for ourselves.
WA state here - it's ridiculous that I have to subsidize chuds in Mississippi and Louisiana when they won't even give their citizens human rights. they're all about fiscal responsibility until it comes to paying their own fucking bills.
edit: love the chudvotes, do we have some cranky MS and LA types? pay your fucking bills jerkfaces. fuck, half your budgets come from federal funds we pour more into.
Federal taxes don't actually work that way. The federal government prints its own money. All taxes effectively go into a giant shredder and are unrelated to spending.
I don’t even know where to begin correcting such an insane statement. Why do you think k taxes are collected if it just gets shredded? Sadistic pleasure?
He makes a good point, it's just to balance the inflation. Take the tax money to offset the federal reserve printing swathes of money to fund government endeavors.
It's a real theory. From what I understand though the shredder is a thought experiment, not meant to be taken seriously. They do acknowledge that you have to receive money to spend money. they just think of it like a balancing act instead of a 1 to 1 relationship.
If we are going to do a tax protest we will need some kind of guarantees from the state government. Otherwise going to war with the IRS will not work. The IRS always wins.
I'm not sure that's feasible, since the states don't just sign a check to the Feds once a year, it's paid via payroll taxes. To my knowledge, there is no kind of mechanism for entire states to collectively refuse payment.
That costs money in state taxes, and the GOP is working on reducing the state and local tax deductions in the federal tax code. Making states who are trying to create good living conditions for their citizens prohibitively expensive to live in. It's horse shit.
The amount of times I've heard salty right wing grifters complain about Orwellian censorship on literally everything. But I guess it's just fine if cult leader Trump does it, because he stands for what's right and sticks it to those progressive plebs, right?
It's just them wanting to a) be right (when it's usually not the case) and 2) the other viewpoint to be silent immediately. They fuckin love censorship because first amendment only applies to them and theirs.
He didn't win by being consistent. Hypocrisy is WHY people voted for him. They thought he was the only one who would "do the hard things" by being cruel to the people who are hurting everyone. That's the narrative at least, and while you can literally write libraries on the flaws, inconsistencies and logical discrepancies in Trump and the Republican narratives, the fact remains that most people are vulnerable to storylines.
Not moral flaws. Not character. Not record or experience. The only thing people largely, as a group, care about is JUST how someone makes them feel in that moment. And a lot of poorly educated, mentally unwell people saw and heard Trump lying to the people they believe were the cause of all our woes, and that's why they voted for him.
If we ever want another democracy that works, we have to understand that our population is genetically and physically identical to the beings who were clubbing each other's heads in during ten thousand years of ice age glaciers and primitive hardship. We survived those times by forming tight-knight groups and telling o
... show more
He didn't win by being consistent. Hypocrisy is WHY people voted for him. They thought he was the only one who would "do the hard things" by being cruel to the people who are hurting everyone. That's the narrative at least, and while you can literally write libraries on the flaws, inconsistencies and logical discrepancies in Trump and the Republican narratives, the fact remains that most people are vulnerable to storylines.
Not moral flaws. Not character. Not record or experience. The only thing people largely, as a group, care about is JUST how someone makes them feel in that moment. And a lot of poorly educated, mentally unwell people saw and heard Trump lying to the people they believe were the cause of all our woes, and that's why they voted for him.
If we ever want another democracy that works, we have to understand that our population is genetically and physically identical to the beings who were clubbing each other's heads in during ten thousand years of ice age glaciers and primitive hardship. We survived those times by forming tight-knight groups and telling ourselves stories for how to survive. We're doing the same things right now, but someone else is guiding those stories. Either we stop the storytellers or we make better stories that people will want to repeat. Those are our only options.
Either we stop the storytellers or we make better stories that people will want to repeat.
We do have better stories: the stories or class conflict and workers solidarity. It's just that the people in power would rather fascists win than let those stories reach the people that need to hear them.
If the stories aren't working, they're not better.
"Better" here is going to be a highly loaded word, and revolves a lot around what results you're seeking. Humans connect with stories that connect with their feelings, it's how they got exploited to get us here. Decades of people signing away their own rights in service of stories that momentarily scared them, and here we are in the culmination of all these tiny stories and resulting policies that have been made to steer people to this place and time.
You can't just tell people now "Trump is the bad guy, trans people aren't threatening us, we have to help Ukraine, the wealthy elite are our real enemies."
It doesn't matter if the story is true, that story doesn't move people. It's just lecturing to the toddler-mind that makes up the bulk of our population. You can't make the people better. We HAVE to abandon this idea that everyone wants to "do the right thing" on some level. No we fucking don't. People want to feel validated. Not even feel good, that's less important to people than feeling heard and vali
... show more
If the stories aren't working, they're not better.
"Better" here is going to be a highly loaded word, and revolves a lot around what results you're seeking. Humans connect with stories that connect with their feelings, it's how they got exploited to get us here. Decades of people signing away their own rights in service of stories that momentarily scared them, and here we are in the culmination of all these tiny stories and resulting policies that have been made to steer people to this place and time.
You can't just tell people now "Trump is the bad guy, trans people aren't threatening us, we have to help Ukraine, the wealthy elite are our real enemies."
It doesn't matter if the story is true, that story doesn't move people. It's just lecturing to the toddler-mind that makes up the bulk of our population. You can't make the people better. We HAVE to abandon this idea that everyone wants to "do the right thing" on some level. No we fucking don't. People want to feel validated. Not even feel good, that's less important to people than feeling heard and validated. Our stories need to make individuals feel something, individuals who view everything outside of their immediate sphere of awareness as abstractions and theory, not reality. You can't make these people feel sympathy or care for others, so we have to make them feel something else.
hey, just chiming in to say I really do appreciate your perspective -- Narrative therapy is a real tool that can help people. and yet i think by implying that a narrative is "worse" if it doesn't "work", you're overlooking the force of other systemic factors. just think about the logistics of these stories reaching people's ears. who has command over our attention? what narratives are people exposed to on a day-to-day basis? where does the power lie behind those messages? the idea that the best narrative is the one that thrives is akin to meritocratic thinking -- a demonstrably flawed system.
the idea that the best narrative is the one that thrives
I was pretty clear that the effectiveness of a narrative is dependant on the results you're seeking. I think you can turn a narrative loose into the world and it will run autonomously to a degree, and you could use a story's ability to thrive and survive as a measure of at least how attractive and engaging it is, but no, I don't think that is what makes a story effective for the purposes of influencing a large amount of people to make better choices, to have more curiosity, to think more about things they don't normally think about.
Social engineering like this does take deliberate work. It takes effort and work to keep a story alive and growing. The problem is we already have tons of people doing this work for their own agendas. Sometimes they're good stories, sometimes they're terrible stories, but it almost doesn't matter the "quality" of the narrative, since our brains are designed to hook into narratives to explain the world even if the explanation doesn't even make a lick of sense. See: anti-vax doctors and flat earthers.
Can you give examples of what you think might be working stories?
It's really hard to create a narrative with the sheer power and influence of stories using fear and hate, because we all respond much stronger to fear and anger than we do more abstract ideas like charity and empathy as a matter of survival. I genuinely have no idea how you fight this. It's literally an exploitation of all of our survival responses and it will always work on some segment of any given population, and once it starts to work on a few people, the effect will snowball. My prescription here is that we can't let hate speech start in the first place. We have held the sanctity of bad ideas in too much regard for too long, other nations don't fuck around with this shit because they know how contagious hate and fear is.
There is however one great example of successful, working populism I can think of though, and that's Bernie Sanders. He's been effective in messaging to both right and left for decades because he's consistent, he validates our problems and keeps his fo
... show more
Can you give examples of what you think might be working stories?
It's really hard to create a narrative with the sheer power and influence of stories using fear and hate, because we all respond much stronger to fear and anger than we do more abstract ideas like charity and empathy as a matter of survival. I genuinely have no idea how you fight this. It's literally an exploitation of all of our survival responses and it will always work on some segment of any given population, and once it starts to work on a few people, the effect will snowball. My prescription here is that we can't let hate speech start in the first place. We have held the sanctity of bad ideas in too much regard for too long, other nations don't fuck around with this shit because they know how contagious hate and fear is.
There is however one great example of successful, working populism I can think of though, and that's Bernie Sanders. He's been effective in messaging to both right and left for decades because he's consistent, he validates our problems and keeps his focus laser-tight and narrow on one talking point: which is how the wealthy oligarchs are hoarding our wealth. That's all, and he's held the same talking point for decades and it works on both sides of the political spectrum. It's just a shame that we're in a place where power has already been ceded to the corporate interests and people like Bernie are muzzled long before they get real power.
In no way am I defending this behavior but wouldn't this only apply to public universities and colleges? The many that are technically private property can entirely ignore this correct?
Previously I thought almost all of them were, but then I found out that someone I've known for years hold that view. Any mention that maybe voting for the democrats would be a good idea results in an angry speech about genocide; which somehow (I'm not sure how) even has them lean towards Trump.
I appreciate the staunch opposition to genocide. But its kind of weird to see someone take a single issue so strongly to heart that their reasoning ends up inverted such that the candidate they favour is worse even on their one issue.
I don't think Lemmy was really big enough to have THAT many bots. And at least of the ones I saw, if they were bots they're doing an incredibly good job of making them blend, since many had a history of generally normal commenting before that time, and have continued posting normally since.
The Lemmy.World mods permabanned and removed my account after I made a detailled posed exposing them for being massive Zionists in one of my posts on yepowetrippingbastards which got removed by db0. (A powetripping bastard. Ironic).
I am a lot less active since the trifecta of libs (db0, .world and blahaj) instantly ban my accounts. As soon as this was created I made a post about the Lemmy.world mods going on a Zionist power trip and removing my account and db0's response was to ban this account as well and censor the whole ordeal.
Yeah it's always a badass take when it comes from a guy who kills literal monsters. Anyone old enough to have unsupervised internet knows we're not that guy.
Right, because the people who voted against trump are the ones that can--in a single election--dismantle and oppressive two party system crafted by an oligarchy feeding people the illusion of choice so they won't riot. Of course the few of us who understand this and actually voted for the candidate with the best shot are able to do this. And of course we should have done this before all of the mass voter fraud being uncovered could lead to Trump taking an office he didn't actually win. You're absolutely right. Let me call everyone up and let them know we need to regroup.
Correct. This is a major problem. The point is that it wasn't made by the people, and the few of us who understand how problematic it is can't simply make a new party and have it be successful. That doesn't fix the two party system. America is a shit show, but some of us are doing what we can, and that isn't enough but that's not our faults.
I'm not doing that. That's not what's happening. If you interpreted it that way, that is unfortunate. However, I am not, in fact, blaming people. Non voters couldn't have fixed this. Voters couldn't have fixed this. No one is being blamed. Except I'm kind of blaming you for not understanding what I said. But only kind of, and mostly as a joke.
Exactly. And you have people like me who refused to vote for Democrats because while they might not be as horrible as Donald Trump, there is still too much wrong with them for me to support them. I get called a Tankie bot whether I don’t vote or I vote third-party so fuck the DNC
Except why does that vote have to mean that you support them and not that you don't support the even worse people. If we may never be able to vote again and may never have another ruler besides dictator don Will that have been worth the moral high ground?
Participating in an election means you are agreeing to abide by the outcome of the election. By not participating you are protesting and saying I not recognise the legitimacy of this process.
Inaction IS an action the only choice for non voting is ignorance OR confidence your actions will lead to an outcome that involves a new party entering or reforming. But again the issue is KNOWINGLY If trump won everyone said and knew we would be losing our rights and democracy and ANY chance to vote for someone much more reasonable so now there will be no process for you to not recognize I guess.
Something i'd like to ask is what did you expect but legitimately. And what are you doing to fix it you cant have a plan for having the betterment of a problem like in Gaza it fail cause both of the two known and only voteable options are genociders then choose to do nothing and that be the entire plan right. Assumedly your forming groups, protesting, pushing for reform not JUST non voting and sitting being a key board warrior right?
Wrong. The act of living in the USA at all is agreeing to recognise their laws and processes and outcomes of elections. You sound like one of those sovereign citizens that think they can get out of arrest/court/prison by "not consenting" to it.
The opposition party could obviously be better, but I think they were strong enough that "no preference" wasn't the right choice. (After all, choosing not to vote is essentially a vote that says "I don't care who wins".)
Labor party, Democrat, republican/ conservative, maga, etc. . And cut it out with this D/R bullshit. It's maddening. There are people that have a serious moral issue casting a vote for some of the choices given.
I'm sure a lot of the people who sat it out are more informed and upset with what is going on than some of those that "chose the lesser evil". They have every right to be furious.
I swear I saw lots of "Genocide Joe" people around before the election so there must be some overlap of at least bots.. now where are these ppl when it comes to Trump's beach resort proposal of ethnic cleansing?
Ah of course, the people who didn't want Joe Biden to support genocide decided to vote for Trump so he could support genocide even harder. That makes sense
Honestly I'm just scared. I tried the civil way and voted and protested and went to marches and told everyone I knew. But now I'm just scared, it seems like the only option left is action of a violent nature and I don't know if I'm mentally prepared to throw my life away in prison or dead to try and stop the fascism. I know I have guns and if it tries to take me from my home I won't go down quietly, but I'm just scared to make the first move only to end up a martyr.
You are not wrong. The Supreme Court finding presidential immunity and then allowing an insurrectionist to run in contravention of the 14th amendment seems to have finally put the old document to rest.
The problem is it cuts both ways. The Democrats saying they want hate speech to not be protected and Nazi propaganda to be censored is just the flipside of the same coin.
It was both. They were advertised as free, they are free, but there are limits despite them being free
Nothing free is unlimited.
Alternatively Americans have no freedoms at all because they all have limits.
Freedom of Travel? You can't walk through a military base.
Freedom of Religion? No one is going to recognize your Jedi holy day. (Not to mention the government not recognizing the religious right to an abortion from Jews or TST.)
Freedom of commerce? You're not allowed to purchase heroin or import things from Cuba.
Fair enough. I think the discussion ends there; I cannot use reason to dissuade you from a position that you clearly did not use reason to get yourself into.
The phrase “shouting fire in a crowded theater” is outdated and legally irrelevant to modern free speech discussions. Its origin from Schenck v. United States (1919) was overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), which set a much higher standard for restricting speech. Modern First Amendment doctrine protects almost all speech unless it directly incites imminent violence or crime.
No. Even that limitation is unconstitutional. Look up the actual convictions and appeal rates for them
The most recent one is just a couple of months old where a guy threatened Kevin McCarthy, the House speaker, over 100 times on the phone and he only got probation because the judge knew the prison sentence wouldn’t withstand appeal.
Society and laws are at the mercy of those who are in control. Right now in the US it is the Trump administration, but I remember Barack Obama saying, “I’ve got a pen, and I’ve got a phone,” emphasizing his ability to take executive action without waiting for Congress to push his agenda forward.
If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance
... show more
If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal. (Karl Popper)
Free speech isn't intended to supercede criminal law. Advocating for hurting people is a crime. If they want to do it and have it be covered as "free speech", they need to start by changing the law.
Advocating for hurting people is not a crime. Even an inactionable threat is not a crime. Look up precedent for arrests of inciting a riot and see how many of those charges actually stuck or help up on appeal.
The fact that people are saying yore okay to punch Nazis in the face would be a violation of what you are advocating for but you have no problem with that because you don’t like Nazis.
I personally don't support people saying that either. Punching people in the face is not a great way to change their minds that they are being "the bad guy". And I think seeing alot of people post that, is counter productive to the goal of getting along and solving problems together reasonably.
But I don't, and shouldn't, control what everyone else thinks is a good idea.
It's really not, though. Making a specific, credible threat against someone can be, but speaking in general terms that someone ought to be hurt without specifying how, when, or by who is not.
I'm sure you'll become correct momentarily, though, once Trump declares that calling for his removal (or hell, any criticism of the regime because why not?) would "hurt" him politically and is therefore a felony. That is what you had in mind, right?
There is a massive difference between allowed to say my government is doing something wrong, and being allowed to say "gas all the kikes". One is criticism of authority, which is good. The other is hate speech, which is bad. You can absolutely have one without the other.
Every freedom ends where freedoms of others are infringed. That includes every freedom, let it be freedom of movement (you can go wherever, but not someone else's house), freedom of expression (you can express yourself however, unless that expression instills hatred towards others, inflicts trauma on kids etc. etc.) and yes, also freedom of speech (You can say anything, unless what you do is calling for violence, attacks someone etc.).
Some of you US guys really don't understand how freedom in a society works.
Is it so hard to believe you think Free speech should be absolute weapon should be unrestricted, abortion should be unrestricted, people should be able to harness electricity from solar and harness rainwater from the sky?
Because these are all things that are restricted here except for speech, so I am sure as fuck not going to budge on it
I thought you were replying to me at first, but it just reaffirm what I said so now it looks like you were replying to someone else maybe
The ruling reaffirmed that the government cannot punish speech just because it is offensive or upsetting, reinforcing strong protections for free speech under the First Amendment.
Nope, I was definitely replying to you. The court decided there's a subtle difference and that their "God hates fags" signs skirt hate speech laws quite well within the US legal framework. And I unfortunately agree as a gay atheist.
it just reaffirm what I said
Hold on. The fact that they went to trial over it and that there was litigation of the particular use of language is indication that not all speech is free speech and that careful consideration of where that line is was required. If their signs had been different this ruling would've also been quite different based on the same premise.
I mean just to be fair isn't it illegal to have a huge protest without informing the authorities first? Also violent protests would be illegal too, right?
These assumptions are based on similar laws from other countries. But I don't really believe Trump is talking about those protests or just planning to forbid them from getting permission to happen.
How many universities will abandon free speech rights for 10% of their budget? Hard to say, many abandoned them for less when students were protesting genocide.
It's the USA, the only things that matters is money. Universities are already run like business so dont expect anything else than financial decisions. It will just make usa even more under-educated if that's even possible. Higher education wont mean anything exceot that your parents are rich.
How many universities will abandon free speech rights for 10% of their budget?
All of them. Of course they'll frame it like "to enable our storied institution to continue performing our vital work, we are temporarily putting a moratorium on non-pre-approved meetings. Thank you for your understanding."
If only y'all had some sort of constitution with some sort of amendment that ment you had free speech and another that said you had weapons with which to defend said constitution.
Re the 1st amendment, sure. But the 2nd amendment link between weapon ownership and defense of freedom has been comprehensively nullified by the United States Supreme Court (via gross judicial overreach in their 2008 decision on DC v. Heller).
That word doesn't mean anything to him, except as a tool to prosecute people he doesn't like. Obviously laws and illegality don't mean shit when it's him breaking the law.
Pretty sure there is enough evidence for treason at this point, but Congress won't act on it.
They won't. They couldn't even get upset over kids being massacred every week in their schools. They are a broken people. Have been for decades. Their military.and economy didn't fail. Their moral fiber did. They substituted thoughts and prayers and other virtue signalling for community organisation and direct action.
If you think I am wrong then don't reply. Go outside and prove it. Nobody gives a shit what people write in social media. It means nothing.
Exactly. In Ukraine parents fight and die so their 4 year old will have a country to return to. In the US they let their souls die instead and leave their kids to fight their own battles.
You are a nation of Uvalde cops.
Downvote me. Argue. In your hearts you all know it is true. You are broken. You were clearly broken since at least the 90s when you met Columbine with platitudes instead of tens of millions of mothers on the streets screaming in pain.
Edit: And inspire us by what you are doing besides flaming on the Internet. I'm sure you must be doing something, rather than standing by passing the buck? Right?
Thankfully I live in a rich liberal democracy where over 90% vote and we still have a fairly decent though far from perfect society.
I can be outraged by what Americans let happen to their country because I'm human and a parent but I can't help and shouldn't help. American society needs to find its own solutions, in its own time and on terms it can live with.
Sorry, but I think you and those like you are deflecting. I still see posts from Americans saying this wasn't us. We are nice people. We have no power. It is crazy. Why are you even online telling us this? You think we blame you personally?
I live in the other side of the planet. If I am going to help anyone its going to be some poor unfortunate struggling with poverty, war and genocide imposed on them.
Not delusional people from the richest country on earth who had everything and lack the will to influence their own fate.
You don't have to apologize it sucks for us as much or more than it sucks for you.
It's easy to gripe on the Internet for anybody and it's much harder to act. In a country like the US, where do you even start? It is huge, the military has more money than god, and the police force is by and large the little brother of the military but with way less oversight and more dysfunction. You want to stop a city once? Sure, np big deal. You want to bring this country to heel? That takes coordination.
It's really easy to talk if you are in western Europe where your country is the size of one middle of the road US state and you've got 8 months of vacation a year. Same if your country has like 8 cities total because basically 3/4 of your nation/continent is uninhabitable. You do not share the same problems of scale. Period. At all. I could go out tomorrow and get killed for no reason, but what purpose does that serve?
I'm glad you have a good view from your high horse. Consider doing something more than watch, because you know what? You could be next. I'm here asking for tips
... show more
You don't have to apologize it sucks for us as much or more than it sucks for you.
It's easy to gripe on the Internet for anybody and it's much harder to act. In a country like the US, where do you even start? It is huge, the military has more money than god, and the police force is by and large the little brother of the military but with way less oversight and more dysfunction. You want to stop a city once? Sure, np big deal. You want to bring this country to heel? That takes coordination.
It's really easy to talk if you are in western Europe where your country is the size of one middle of the road US state and you've got 8 months of vacation a year. Same if your country has like 8 cities total because basically 3/4 of your nation/continent is uninhabitable. You do not share the same problems of scale. Period. At all. I could go out tomorrow and get killed for no reason, but what purpose does that serve?
I'm glad you have a good view from your high horse. Consider doing something more than watch, because you know what? You could be next. I'm here asking for tips and tricks and you're in AUS looking down your nose while you suck your own dick. Real cool man.
And if people think they are alone and have no power perhaps consider reading books about Abolishionists, Underground Railroad, Suffragettes, Labour Unions, Socialists, the Civil Rights Movement, Gay rights, Anti-war protests, Environmentalists and all the other ordinary Americans who made a fucking effort and delivered real improvements to peoples every day lives while the thoughts and prayers brigade wasted the last decade taking selfies and lamenting their disenfranchisement on social media. The template is there. Just read a fucking book.
Hey let's go broski. Are you right or aren't you? Are you giving up because all of AUS is like #3 to all US states by population? It's so easy: whatever works for AUS you only have to work for 13 TIMES the population in the US and then you win. Look how fuckin easy it is! Where are you? Your parents house? Surely they have Internet too.
Edit: or MAYBE you can be humble, STFU and try to help? Otherwise you can keep being a pretentious knob, and nobody will know it but us. By balance of probability your only like 13 anyway. Today I'm not feeling so charitable to dickbags.
You're spot on... I might argue that that moral fiber has pretty much never existed. But do you have any insight on how one even begins to restore that moral fiber?
Gimme a break, I don't expect you to know everything that goes on here, just as all I "know" about Australia is "you" made Murdoch, continue to abuse native people just like us, and dingos regularly eat babies. Like asserting that no Australian people care about those issues is wrong and obviously my fundamental understanding of the country is flawed, it's also wrongheaded to assert the American people are all broken and spineless for years and have bad moral fiber (I'll assume this is a normal saying for y'all elsewhere, but that sounds like a nationalistic dog whistle to my ears).
It is especially bizarre to claim that Americans are incapable of direct action a few years after the country had some pretty explosive sustained protests against police violence and racism. The US is filled with broken people, yes, but not because of some nebulous moral failing, and it's the broken government you have an issue with, not the poor fools who were born here.
Looking to the mentioned protests a few years back might explain the lack of similar reaction now. They burned
... show more
Gimme a break, I don't expect you to know everything that goes on here, just as all I "know" about Australia is "you" made Murdoch, continue to abuse native people just like us, and dingos regularly eat babies. Like asserting that no Australian people care about those issues is wrong and obviously my fundamental understanding of the country is flawed, it's also wrongheaded to assert the American people are all broken and spineless for years and have bad moral fiber (I'll assume this is a normal saying for y'all elsewhere, but that sounds like a nationalistic dog whistle to my ears).
It is especially bizarre to claim that Americans are incapable of direct action a few years after the country had some pretty explosive sustained protests against police violence and racism. The US is filled with broken people, yes, but not because of some nebulous moral failing, and it's the broken government you have an issue with, not the poor fools who were born here.
Looking to the mentioned protests a few years back might explain the lack of similar reaction now. They burned youth prisons, occupied police stations, ran for office, took to the streets, were shot at, gassed, and went to jail. For what? Nothing changed endured, the establishment "left" abandoned the movement and helped undo any change that occured, the government clamped down harder on dissent, and Trump got reelected. Maybe the methods of resistance have to change to succeed, you cant keep fighting the war of yesterday and expect to win after all, and you sure don't have to publicize your actions for online strangers to check your moral fiber.
Posting may be meaningless, but I'd say all this to your face if we were talking in person too. Communication is how we change and change minds, and leaving nonsense unchallenged is how we got into this mess in the first place, and I won't make that mistake here or in my non digital life.
I am not the enemy and I am genuinely sorry for your hardship (though not nearly as much as for people born into poverty, war and genocide in far lass fortunate countries)
Americans trying to justify themselves on social media seems like a waste of energy and focus and its probably not good for mental health. Outside opinion that contradicts the narratives we have in our heads is important. My opinion might be wrong but its a genuine observation. My very real fear is we can't rely on US citizens to fight for their democracy anymore and that has global implications for the world and my children's future. Please prove me wrong. I love to learn new things. The BLM protests were huge but perhaps they turned from grass roots outrage into a social media phenomenon instead of a real effective political movement.
Protecting our kids is an issue that cuts across all beliefs, races, classes to the heart of our humanity, the most basic goodness that unites our species. I think the turning point, if such a thing exists, may have been Columbine, 1999. Not the bad guys on 9/11, not
... show more
I am not the enemy and I am genuinely sorry for your hardship (though not nearly as much as for people born into poverty, war and genocide in far lass fortunate countries)
Americans trying to justify themselves on social media seems like a waste of energy and focus and its probably not good for mental health. Outside opinion that contradicts the narratives we have in our heads is important. My opinion might be wrong but its a genuine observation. My very real fear is we can't rely on US citizens to fight for their democracy anymore and that has global implications for the world and my children's future. Please prove me wrong. I love to learn new things. The BLM protests were huge but perhaps they turned from grass roots outrage into a social media phenomenon instead of a real effective political movement.
Protecting our kids is an issue that cuts across all beliefs, races, classes to the heart of our humanity, the most basic goodness that unites our species. I think the turning point, if such a thing exists, may have been Columbine, 1999. Not the bad guys on 9/11, not Putin election interference or MAGA. That is the issue that would have really outraged most countries. Millions on the streets protesting. Politicians of all parties scrambling to act. The shootings kept getting worse every year and it was swept under the carpet. More than the homelessness, wealth inequality, healthcare, that makes me worry a lot for your future and by extension the rest of us. We are definitely drifting to the right here and are a worse society as a result but for all our similarities and weaknesses that is still the the most fundamental issue that separates your politics and society from ours which is why I think we can never really be in your situation (we also don't have the historical acrimony and economic disadvantage stemming from a bloody civil war).
I remember when the Democrats brought down the hammer hard on anti-genocide protestors in universities. Trump is doing the same, but expanding it to all protests.
Trump is worse I never said otherwise. My point isn’t that Republicans aren’t worse, but that the Democrats failed to live up to expectations of their constituents and helped lead us down this path.
they also allowed russia to back these protests, wierdly nobody actually came out with the news over this after the initial invasion of gaza(it was reported early on the protests on campuses were heavily backed by RU and anti-palestine jewish groups, one famous one is Seinfelds wife.
Killing protesters is too visible and often sparks outrage. Quietly deporting them or using behind-the-scenes methods to remove them is more discreet and allows the agenda to progress with less resistance.
Of course he does. His whole ascent to Presidency has had plenty on display. This isn't new. It's because people see him behave this way that he got this far. That's the problem.
Apparantly, (in the US) any protest that needs to occupy the road requires a permit. Yea imagine how stupid it is, you want to protest the government and you need to apply for permission?!? I was shocked when my teacher told me about this. Seems like a huge First Amendment violation to me, but society just goes along with it. 😓
So unless your protest is strictly on the sidewalk, you need a permit. So fucking dumb.
Might I suggest that instead of targeting fellow victims for undue harassment, you direct your attention toward the actual perpetrators and their supporters? For environmental causes, might I suggest some sort of shop where an oil-based product like gasoline or diesel fuel is sold? Perhaps an entity that sells or services the vehicles that consume those fuels.
Perhaps you could publish a manifesto telling the public and these businesses alike what businesses need to do in order to avoid Molotov-flavored "civil disobedience". Things like "a majority of the cars on a dealer's lot must be EVs" and "EVs should be priced lower than comparable ICE vehicles". Or "fuel stations should have at least as many charging stations as fuel pumps".
When you publish your manifesto, make sure it gets sent to insurance companies, preferably the companies insuring the businesses responsible for the environmental catastrophe we are facing.
We have enough laws against public use of the street. There is no need to demonstrate for more.
that's literally why blocking roads in protest is so effective. enough angry calls to the mayor office due to people being late for work etc, is how protesting puts pressure on representatives to actually represent the people.
or did you think that huddling on sidewalks holding signs was supposed to do something?
Blocking roads in protest has proven effective at exactly one thing: Increasing the enforcement and penalties for jaywalking.
It is counterproductive at everything else.
did you think that huddling on sidewalks holding signs was supposed to do something?
Where did I say huddle on sidewalks?
I think JSO should be firebombing ICE car dealerships, gas stations, muffler shops, and other entities and agents of the oil industry. Not harassing victims of that industry.
No doubt, no doubt. There are plenty of articles claiming JSO protests are effective.
Of course, if they were actually effective, you wouldn't need to point to news articles promoting the virtues of standing around in the street. You'd be able to point to oil consumption rates. If their protests were actually effective, oil consumption rates would be falling.
The reality is that those articles do nothing but make you feel good, like something is being done. But reality doesn't care about feelings, or the fiddling articles designed to make us feel good while the world burns.
If that is the only metric you are looking it, kind of. It slumped during COVID and has looked like it's tailing off somewhat. Without tax breaks, subsidies and support for other forms of transport, say, we will not shake our dependence.
But, we can look at specific countries and see if those things have helped on a national scale, like Norway, for example, which has seen consumption decline since 2018. And Sweden. And Japan. And Germany. And...
I am telling you when their trend started. Norway's consumption has not increased, it is down on 2018, as I said. It had a slight decline in 2023 (the increase between 2020 and 2022 is when people stopped driving during COVID then came back to restart its downward trend).
Japan’s decline since then is commensurate with its population decline.
Actually no, if you know what commensurate means. The population has dropped around 4% since 2008, yet oil consumption has been decreasing since 1996.
Germany is similar in terms of consumption, Sweden likewise.
JSO didn't exist in 1996 or 2008 or 2018 or 2020. It was founded in 2022.
You're giving JSO traffic obstructions credit for declines that happened decades before they came into existence, and in countries where they havent actually disrupted traffic.
You're giving them credit for "declines" that have actually been increases since the time they started regularly obstructing traffic in 2022.
Obstructing traffic is not an effective means of protest. Target actual agents and entities associated with the oil industry, not the victims.
I would like to spend less time talking to environmentalists about useless people harassing victims of the oil industry, and more time actually targeting the oil industry.
For that, you don't need to identify massive, centralized oil infrastructure. You need to look at the oil industry's agents and operations within your own community. There is no shortage of businesses associated with the supplies and maintenance of ICE vehicles. Every one of those businesses needs to feel direct pressure to focus on EVs, other transportation alternatives, or go out of business.
Gas/petrol stations and car dealerships, for example. Set a standard for them to follow; target them for an appropriate degree of hostility when they don't.
For gas stations, they can install at least as many EV charging stations as they have fuel pumps.
For dealerships, they must offer more EVs than ICE vehicles, and the sticker price of those EVs must be equal to or lower than comparable ICE vehicles.
... show more
and how would you like to quantify that
I would like to spend less time talking to environmentalists about useless people harassing victims of the oil industry, and more time actually targeting the oil industry.
For that, you don't need to identify massive, centralized oil infrastructure. You need to look at the oil industry's agents and operations within your own community. There is no shortage of businesses associated with the supplies and maintenance of ICE vehicles. Every one of those businesses needs to feel direct pressure to focus on EVs, other transportation alternatives, or go out of business.
Gas/petrol stations and car dealerships, for example. Set a standard for them to follow; target them for an appropriate degree of hostility when they don't.
For gas stations, they can install at least as many EV charging stations as they have fuel pumps.
For dealerships, they must offer more EVs than ICE vehicles, and the sticker price of those EVs must be equal to or lower than comparable ICE vehicles.
Businesses that meet these standards are supporting the "transportation" industry. Businesses that fail to meet these standards are supporting the "oil" industry.
JSO's website makes it clear that "arrests" are an important part of their demonstrations. There are plenty of arrest-worthy actions they can take at a gas station. They can create plenty of "awareness" at an ICE car dealership, and they can do it without convincing the general public to support cops and right-wing politicians.
I think it’s probably like more roads = more permits needed to protest.
I’m in the US and all too familiar with how car centric our infrastructure is. On top of the permit thing, our angry rushed populace will demonize you for protesting anything if you’re blocking the road to do it. You could be giving CPR to a toddler and within minutes some emotional support truck would be running you over or rolling coal in your face.
You don’t need a permit to march in the streets or on sidewalks, as long as marchers don’t obstruct car or pedestrian traffic. And that makes a lot of sense because if you block a road perhaps emergency services need to know ahead of time that they can't take that route. Or others concerns may be relevant. For the very same reasons this is similar in countries around the world. Source: aclu.org/know-your-rights/prot…
The First Amendment protects your right to assemble and express your views through protest. However, police and other government officials are allowed to place certain narrow restrictions on the exercise of speech rights.
Errr, they can be illegal if they break other laws, like obstructing traffic, damaging property, or trespass on private property. It's manageable with small groups, but it's hard to coordinate an angry, large group to not do that. That's when they call in police and that's when they make arrests.
Make sure to keep blaming "rednecks" and "hillbillies", and not the billionaire backers of MAGA who own various media outlets and some of the largest companies in the world.
I'm honestly worried about a mask ban EO, without any exceptions for medical or other purposes, partially because I hate the destructive use of AI and facial recognition tech, partially because I hate ableism, partially because I love public health, among other reasons. I think protecting your identity is not just a right but a moral imperative when taking certain positive and productive actions, so you have the chance to continue the work. In addition I think protecting oneself and others from airborne diseases is a must if one intends to abide by a policy of harm reduction, pollution is another concern as well.
Let the record reflect that, while this has not yet occurred, the fact that you have to ask is concerning enough to warrant treatment as if it has occurred. Furthermore, college campuses are one of the primary places that protest movements begin in recent years. Declaring protest illegal in nebulous terms like this is a HUGE swing toward breaking open the full fascism piñata.
An illegal protest, according to conservatives, is any protest they disagree with. Waving picket signs or blocking traffic is disruptive, destructive, and illegal. Storming the capitol is, on the other hand, a perfectly acceptable peaceful protest.
Remember, he’s only got the intelligence of a kumquat. He doesn’t even understand that he’s too stupid to understand anything. He vomits whatever he thinks give his followers happy endings.
He doesn’t give a shit about the speech. It’s the schools and universities he wants to harm. Even if it’s just a matter of disrupting them through legal overwhelm.
A third student was expelled from Columbia's Barnard College on Friday for pro-Palestinian activism that took place on campus last year - ten months after disciplinary proceedings started against them.
Since many answers aren't actually answering the question...
My comment is largely wrong!! See the reply below
~~Most places require a permit to assemble en masse. There are "free speech zones" where you can create large gatherings without any kind of advance notice or permit or whatever. Most universities have a free speech zone towards the middle of their campuses. Cities will also often have at least one but somewhere that doesn't inconvenience commerce, like a park or near city hall.~~
~~Most mass assembly requires a permit and sometimes a fee, even in public places. Following this prevents arrest by "disturbing the peace" or other such laws, usually.~~
~~How this squares with the first amendment is interpretation. Individual freedom of speech is protected except very specific public order and safety things, e.g. calling for violence. Coordinated, mass freedom of speech is perceived as a fast path to rioting.~~
~~I'm not saying this is right, but this is my understanding of how things work. I'm not a lawyer or an expert in these matters. This is j
... show more
Since many answers aren't actually answering the question...
My comment is largely wrong!! See the reply below
~~Most places require a permit to assemble en masse. There are "free speech zones" where you can create large gatherings without any kind of advance notice or permit or whatever. Most universities have a free speech zone towards the middle of their campuses. Cities will also often have at least one but somewhere that doesn't inconvenience commerce, like a park or near city hall.~~
~~Most mass assembly requires a permit and sometimes a fee, even in public places. Following this prevents arrest by "disturbing the peace" or other such laws, usually.~~
~~How this squares with the first amendment is interpretation. Individual freedom of speech is protected except very specific public order and safety things, e.g. calling for violence. Coordinated, mass freedom of speech is perceived as a fast path to rioting.~~
~~I'm not saying this is right, but this is my understanding of how things work. I'm not a lawyer or an expert in these matters. This is just what I learned from activist friends in my university time ages ago.~~
As for expulsion, public universities are run by states. To my understand, Trump has no legal mechanism to do this. He's just talking out of his ass or expects to bully public institutions into expelling students by threatening to withhold department of education funding... but he's planning to kill that anyway, so 🤷♂️
I spent most of my 20s doing grassroots campaigning, with a large part of it being protest planning and organization. You generally do not need a permit to conduct protests on public property, even large ones, in the USA.
The exceptions are very specific; i.e. blocking roads may require a permit.
The First Amendment protects your right to assemble and express your views through protest. However, police and other government officials are allowed to place certain narrow restrictions on the exercise of speech rights.
A third student was expelled from Columbia's Barnard College on Friday for pro-Palestinian activism that took place on campus last year - ten months after disciplinary proceedings started against them.
Now apply that law retroactively to catch all women's March supporters cuz fuck women right? And then all the other civil rights matches before women's. They're gonna catch me for protesting migrants Rights during prop 187?? Back in 1998? Those were the days...just the government trying to fuck up the world slowly with room for lube. Trump is power tool going full send after everyone's rights. WTF get the guy out already!!!!
I'm not sure if you've realized, but that means nothing. It has become abundantly clear that the law (and lawsuits) are used by the ruling class and not against them. When used against them, it doesn't matter. They either ignore the fines, pay the pennies, tie it up in court, or in some other way get off scot free.
I'm all for protesting, but make no mistake, people will be made an example of, and it won't be the oppressors.
some colleges in the west are already suffering from low enrollment as it is to the point they had to slash faculty and classes depending on the field, and some schools are even worst off(this is mostly for state univ that arnt very prestigious), more than likely he will do this to most liberal colleges, and it will quickly depopulate the already dwindling student body in some schools. also the one-to-punch of anti-intellectual and the funding for research is also in jeopardy. more expensive schools with more prestige much be able to weather this, since they are less likely to be affected by these cuts that the schools are going through currently at lower levels.
There was a poll a few days before the famous march on Washington that culminated in King's "I have a dream speech" and two thirds of Americans thought the march was unamerican.
America has always hated uppity protesters demanding rights.
Yeah but they are losing out because of all of this as well. A crashing economy will screw everyone over regardless of how they vote. It's not like any of his plans have policies in them to protect his supporters, he doesn't care about his own supporters.
In 4 years time he'll either no longer be able to remain president and will step down due to term limits, or he will have completely taken control and he'll be in charge indefinitely as an actual dictator. Either way he doesn't need his supporters anymore.
but if you think voting with your dollar is going to have enough impact to deter you from getting WHATEVER YOU CAN, then you don't understand how a war works. don't be a liability. don't be stupid. the time for protesting and boycotting is OVER.
I suspect protesting about the police will also be illegal, as will pointing out every time he's contradicted himself on camera. Sometimes in the same clip.
I'm sure that will work well in a country with more guns then people. And I'm sure we will not see more Mario brothers and cousins doing something unexpected.
My point was that it can get bad really fast and I'm sure that there are already people who practice shooting oranges and maybe thinking of shooting a bigger orange.
*I'm not saying this to encourage gun violence. Just that probably someone already thought to do a Mario brother on the big orange.
Then they came from the students, and I watched my parents still beg for more fascism because they thought they were going to be billionaires any day now
They got beaten, jailed and expelled from their uni for protesting over Palestine by the previous fascist who was hoping to draw more of the fascist vote than the current fascist.
Lmao look at all the downvotes you got for being right. If a Democrat was in power right now and did the exact same things that Trump is doing right now, the liberals that are (rightfully) criticising Trump so much would defend the Democrat with their lives.
Absolutely not. The amount of criticism that Biden got you will never see by conservatives about their leader. Their leader wanted to inject bleach and nuke hurricanes and you never heard a pip. Democrats are far more ready to criticize bullshit from their people in power and support alternatives. See Bernie Sanders.
What alternative did Bernie Sanders support? The same fucking guys that beat up American students protesting. And we saw how ready the Democrats were towards criticism when Kamala said "I'm speaking".
The supposed "far more ready to crticize bullshit" LMAO. In practise, regardless of what each claims, Democrats and Republicans are two wings of the same party.
What alternative did Bernie Sanders support? The same fucking guys that beat up American students protesting. And we saw how ready the Democrats were towards criticism when Kamala said "I'm speaking".
The supposed "far more ready to crticize bullshit" LMAO. In practise, regardless of what each claims, Democrats and Republicans are two wings of the same party.
You do yourself and any potential ally a disservice when you spout negative bullshit like this. And it is bullshit because what you're saying is nonsensical and fucking being upvoted (come on lemmy, we're better than this).
They are demanding that their schools, many with massive endowments, financially divest from Israel.
What is the effective message of protesting at a university over Trump? People have been organizing protests, but what part are you demanding the students actually protest? Just... protest Trump in general? at the University? Protesting till he's taken out of office or some action is performed?
I honestly want to see the rest of the government make a choice of bowing or standing up to the would-be king befo
... show more
You do yourself and any potential ally a disservice when you spout negative bullshit like this. And it is bullshit because what you're saying is nonsensical and fucking being upvoted (come on lemmy, we're better than this).
They are demanding that their schools, many with massive endowments, financially divest from Israel.
What is the effective message of protesting at a university over Trump? People have been organizing protests, but what part are you demanding the students actually protest? Just... protest Trump in general? at the University? Protesting till he's taken out of office or some action is performed?
I honestly want to see the rest of the government make a choice of bowing or standing up to the would-be king before we call to send in the children. Let us know where everyone in the system stands because once Uni kids get involved with mass protesting.... it's gonna get dicey real fast.
I really hope the unwarranted attacks that everyone is spewing at each other is statistically on the decline, it really needs to be shot down the instant it's seen so we don't have actual trolls and bots getting footholds.
Ay least in the EU Trump are in Jail or in a Psychatric Clinic and not in the Goverment. Also in the EU there are a lot of things bad, but what ocurres in the US, only cause Facepalms even between the most conservative people.
I'm from Spain, yes, there are also a lot of right wing Australopithecus (VOX), but at least not so much as in other EU countries and anyway far away from the US for light years.
Yeah, you guys have a great, long history of being super chill about immigrants. Maybe our marginalized trans members of society can go hang out in the Romani or Syrian camps and hear about how wonderful European hospitality can be. Oh wait, most of them won't be able to, because they don't have an in-demand technical degree and European countries have strict immigration requirements.
What's happening in America is starting to happen in Europe too. We also thought we were pretty nice, before the mask came off.
I used to be the pride of my family for having finished college. Now it's demonized by them.
I feel for the students of today. College was an important time for me. I experienced a lot of new ideas, my mind was opened. I didn't get to do much in grad school, but my first four years of college changed me and I wouldn't be the same without those experiences. The way the situation is escalating we may see colleges completely locked down or even abolished.
This, in part,is also the educated vs. the uneducated.
Most of Trump's policiet are obviously dumb when given a single thought, but you have to be able to make that throught. The vast majority of magas are not capable of making a first, let alone second, thought
Without the US dept of education, there are going to be no more grants or scholarships. Probably no student loans. Were going to see the absolute gutting of academia in the US and nobody is even aware of it.
Every time I scroll past this image, that’s the line that gets me. Bold threatening declaration by fascist dictator, then ends like a work email reminding you not to leave food in the cafeteria fridge over the weekend.
"You know the best strategy to counter this is to do nothing, it will burn itself out after awhile. If a few people die or get imprisoned well that's okay as long as I don't have to do anything difficult or will affect my portfolio and control. "
obviously I made this quote up but it is how I feel about the people in power that say they are against this administration but really are doing jack shit to support or engage the population. Sure there are some that are doing somethings and I appreciate that, but fuck man do most of the "opposition" party really not have a spine? Like what the fuck, there are millions of citizens that are genuinely scared for their life and freedom and all we are getting is crickets...
That's because left-wing politicians are still politicians. They want to remain politicians they don't want to end up getting arrested or lose their jobs, so they are only going to push back against this to the limit of which they think they can get away with, which basically means making statements, but otherwise not really doing anything.
If you want action you'll have to do it yourself. Unfortunately this does present a bit of a problem because you are then playing into the narrative that the Right have, that everyone who opposes them is a criminal. Because by definition you'll have to commit crimes in order to oppose them, since they will make opposing them a crime. Welcome to the wonderful circular logic of extremists.
He gets to claim he can ignore them. Laws take time to be enforced. Whether he can ignore them or not is up to a bunch of stuff, the courts, congress, the leaders around him, etc. We're just now starting to come into any kind of possibility for real pushback with SCOTUS ruling some USAID payments still have to be made.
Isn't the democrats plan in this situation to call the cops? To use the worlds best justice system? Just call the cops. You know, the ones that murder people/dogs for fun, beat their spouse, make up charges to fuck your life up, and assault protestors?
Just call the cops. I'm sure the wealthy democrats in their gated communities are right on this one. They didn't carefully craft a bipartisan police state alongside the republicans for nothing. They know better then us dirty working class folk
you're not wrong, but for the time being, we need solidarity with every single faction that opposes this administration. if our day of victory ever comes, we can start pointing fingers again.
The point isn't to stop it. It's to scare a few people and ready the maga parents with school-age children who refuse to speak to them for the Kent state reruns we're getting soon.
We really need to tax the mega rich. I compiled this list of numbers after the President speech last night, it's kinda wild:
$ 99,000 - National Median Income is less than $100 thousand.
$ 1,000,000 - 1 Million Dollars.
$ 485,000,000 - Cut Funds to International Relations and whatever.
$ 1,000,000,000 - 1 Billion Dollars. There are over 400 Billionaires in America.
$ 22,000,000,000 - Cut Funds to American Social Serivces through HHS (Human & Health Services).
$ 244,000,000,000 - Elon Musks Net Worth.
$ 1,620,000,000,000 - 1 Trillion Dollars - Meta (Facebooks) Corporate Net Worth.
$19,900,000,000,000 - The U.S. National Debt in Jan 2017 (Obama to Trump)
$27,800,000,000,000 - The U.S. National Debt in Jan 2021 (Trump to Biden)
$36,000,000,000,000 - The U.S. National Debt in Jan 2025 (Biden to Trump)
There are like 760 billionaires last i checked. If we redistributed half the wealth of the top 1% every American would get $69,000 and those rich bastards would still have on average $5,000,000 each.
Okay so since protests are an expression of opinion, and you got that pesky first amendment, all protests are legal, so this tweet is a nothing burger.
The First Amendment protects your right to assemble and express your views through protest. However, police and other government officials are allowed to place certain narrow restrictions on the exercise of speech rights.
Yeah tell that to the legal german tourist who was being held in solitary and then tied to a bed and drugged nonstop for a month cause she missed her flight.
There is. Some form of ranked preference voting. All you need to know is that both parties of the duopoly oppose ranked preference voting. Though the GOP is more vehemently opposed.
I'm not in his district but I was so impressed by Rep. AL Green's (algreen.house.gov/about) courage in standing up to and calling out Krasnov's and the GOP's lies yesterday that I wanted to donate some money. Unlike all the impotent, sclerotic clowns who call themselves the Dem "leadership" and constantly ask me for money whilst the most they do are write "Strongly worded letters" and finger wagging, Rep. Green's website was all about service to his district. I literally could not find a way to donate to him. But he is now a hero of mine. If only HE or one of the few with his courage and fire were leading the Dems. I wish he were 20 years younger. He'd have made a great president.
Yeah. It had nothing at all to do with the ninety fucking million people that didn’t vote. I wonder how many of those were the smug entitled stay at home single issue assholes there were whining And yelling at everyone here all the way to November.
News flash bud: Everyone is in opposition to genocide.
Regardless of whatever bullshit accusation you hurl at people. Refusing to vote because you manufactured enough outrage to believe your own bullshit is absolutely defined as single-issue voting. You know this shit was going to happen- and you knew it was going to be exponentially worse under Trump- but you stood aside anyway.
Take your bow.
And what? I get that you’re fishing for reasons to report people for as that is what you do, but anyone can see that there is nothing at all even close to resembling “holocaust denial” about anything I said, so you can go ahead and put that little straw man away- it’s not going to work on me.
What can you say to that? The Americans knew what they were getting into. They elected a fascist to power who is abolishing democracy. In case you didn't know it yet, let me tell you: America is on the way to becoming a dictatorship.
The American politicians basically barred the ability for any other party to get into power, until people gave up going to vote, and fascism won by a third of the votes.
It all started before the Red Scare. The moment the Robber Barons got their plans thwarted, they started planning so it would never happen again, and they played the long, long game.
You would have a point if "protesting" was "life". But it's not.
When demonstrators were pissed off at Elon Musk, they didn't picket grocery stores and kindergartens. they didnt blockade old folks homes, delay firefighters and ambulances.
They burned Tesla dealerships.
JSO could learn a thing or two from these anti-Musk demonstrators.
They're nice to give you a list of what they fear would be the most effective. The tree of liberty extremely needs to be watered with its natural manure. Get off your lazy ass americunts, stop the fucking cancer or I will destroy space for 500 years.
How much for our first amendment? .....that'll be $24 billon please! You get the presidency too if you're famous. Feel free to grab people by their pussy. Enjoy!
I wonder how will be the US's method for 'accidental demise' moving foward. Defenestration is already taken by Russia, but Trump is not that original, so I'm guessing he'll use the same method, considering he's working form Putin and all.
Trump is following Hitler's cookbook: change the schools, small kids are easier to form/change than adults. I only hope teachers keep teaching what is honest and good!
PerogiBoi
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Atelopus-zeteki, magic_lobster_party, KaRunChiy, timlyo, NoneOfUrBusiness and Someplaceunknown like this.
rational_lib
in reply to PerogiBoi • • •Let's not keep making the mistake of assuming Trump's tweets have force of law. He's just talking out of his ass again, just like he's not actually invading greenland and canada. Notice how he's talking about at least 4 different actions here, I'm pretty sure none of which he can actually do. 5 if you count thanking us for our attention to this matter (?). If Trump tries to do anything in this regard no judge* will uphold it.
*Obligatory other than Clarence Thomas
like this
Someplaceunknown likes this.
PerogiBoi
in reply to rational_lib • • •Laurel Raven
in reply to rational_lib • • •Let's not keep making the mistake of assuming the rule of law matters at this point. If he does something and nobody stops it, its legality or lack there of is moot. If he says to do something and people do it and nobody stops him (or judge's rulings about it are ignored), then it doesn't matter that it was illegal.
I know you're just trying to get people to calm down, but at this point, people are right to be scared and right to think these things could actually come to pass considering it has happened before. Maybe it won't get that far... But plenty has already happened that should never have happened, and the US currently has a president who is illegally, specifically unconstitutionally, holding office and was allowed to be sworn in anyway, so it's probably not a good idea to assume this won't happen just because it's also unconstitutional.
Grandwolf319
in reply to rational_lib • • •Hey remember that wall that didn’t get built?
The fact that no one is trolling him about it shows how people are weirdly compliant about all this.
TheRealCharlesEames
in reply to fossilesque • • •in4apenny
in reply to TheRealCharlesEames • • •God I hope not.
EDIT - It's real.
like this
Nougat and hitstun like this.
fossilesque
in reply to TheRealCharlesEames • • •Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
Truth Sociallike this
Nougat likes this.
𝗧𝗼𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 *𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛
in reply to fossilesque • • •archive.is/vzZ8k
like this
hitstun likes this.
fossilesque
in reply to 𝗧𝗼𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 *𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 • • •brbposting
in reply to 𝗧𝗼𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 *𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 • • •Got a good person out there mirroring those “Truths” too
This one’s at:
trumpstruth.org/statuses/29946
Donald J. Trump: "All Federal Funding will STOP for any College, School, or University that al...
Trump's TruthNougat
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
magic_lobster_party and hitstun like this.
nul9o9
in reply to Nougat • • •like this
magic_lobster_party likes this.
Nougat
in reply to nul9o9 • • •like this
magic_lobster_party likes this.
danekrae
in reply to Nougat • • •fossilesque
in reply to nul9o9 • • •EldritchFeminity
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
hitstun likes this.
Revv
in reply to fossilesque • • •Friendly reminder to everyone: What is pictured in this image is not a molotov, but a self-immolation device that is likely to explode in the hand.
A molotov, on the other hand, consists of a sealed bottle of fuel with a flaming cloth wrapped around it, which prevents ignition of its contents prior to impact.
Ziglin (they/them)
in reply to Revv • • •KⒶMⒶLⒶ WⒶLZ 2Ⓐ24
in reply to fossilesque • • •rustyfish
in reply to Nougat • • •Empricorn
in reply to Nougat • • •Ledericas
in reply to Empricorn • • •birne
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Atelopus-zeteki, KaRunChiy, NoneOfUrBusiness, Shawdow194 and Someplaceunknown like this.
IrateAnteater
in reply to birne • • •like this
Atelopus-zeteki, KaRunChiy, NoneOfUrBusiness, Shawdow194 and Someplaceunknown like this.
NJSpradlin
in reply to IrateAnteater • • •like this
Atelopus-zeteki, KaRunChiy, NoneOfUrBusiness, Shawdow194, Drusas and Someplaceunknown like this.
Atelopus-zeteki
in reply to NJSpradlin • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness and Someplaceunknown like this.
compostgoblin
in reply to NJSpradlin • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness and Someplaceunknown like this.
Darkassassin07
in reply to NJSpradlin • • •There's a lot of things he's not supposed to be able to do.
Until America actually does anything about it; he's got free rein to do whatever the hell he wants.
like this
Someplaceunknown likes this.
Tolookah
in reply to IrateAnteater • • •like this
KaRunChiy and Someplaceunknown like this.
CosmicTurtle0
in reply to IrateAnteater • • •Yeah a lot of states passed "you must carry a doctor's note to wear a mask in public" laws during COVID.
I've written to my Republican state lawmaker only to receive a form reply.
like this
Someplaceunknown likes this.
Thembo McBembo
in reply to birne • • •like this
Atelopus-zeteki, Drusas and Someplaceunknown like this.
I_am_10_squirrels
in reply to Thembo McBembo • • •cm0002
in reply to birne • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
brucethemoose
in reply to birne • • •Masks are for hiding your identity.
But perhaps the double context is intentional.
FundMECFS
in reply to brucethemoose • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness and Drusas like this.
leadore
in reply to birne • • •ploot
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
hitstun likes this.
m532
in reply to ploot • • •cosmicrookie
in reply to fossilesque • • •At this point and with all these new and ilogical rules, Trump is basically Dolores Umbridge!
We need a giant to take him down!
Hubi
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Atelopus-zeteki likes this.
Jo Miran
in reply to fossilesque • • •cybersin
in reply to Jo Miran • • •givesomefucks
in reply to cybersin • • •They only had $1,500,000,00 to spend on Biden/Harris....
How is that supposed to counter the majority of Dem voters not wanting the Dem candidate?
What are they supposed to do?
Run a fair primary, back the winning candidate in the general, and stop bankrupting state parties?!
George Clooney doesn't eat dinner for free ya know....
NSRXN
in reply to cybersin • • •TropicalDingdong
in reply to Jo Miran • • •fartsparkles
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •iAmTheTot
in reply to fartsparkles • • •RowRowRowYourBot
in reply to iAmTheTot • • •iAmTheTot
in reply to RowRowRowYourBot • • •RowRowRowYourBot
in reply to iAmTheTot • • •Lauchs
in reply to iAmTheTot • • •Wait, this seems silly. You are in effect saying that it's wrong to blame those who stayed home because some of them would have voted for trump? Like, we'd still blame those people too had they actually voted trumo.
The blame isn't just because you voted for trump it is because you didn't try to stop him, which applies both to those who voted for him and those who didn't vote.
iAmTheTot
in reply to Lauchs • • •Lauchs
in reply to iAmTheTot • • •iAmTheTot
in reply to Lauchs • • •Lauchs
in reply to iAmTheTot • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to Lauchs • • •Dehumanizing others? Sounds like something a republican would do.
fartsparkles
in reply to iAmTheTot • • •Serinus
in reply to fartsparkles • • •TropicalDingdong
in reply to fartsparkles • • •There are no mental gymnastics, and unless you've been absent in the debate since it began in 2023, it's been one conversation regarding the direction of the Democratic party, with effectively two camps.
The first camp, effectively taking the party line and acting as cheerleaders of the DNC, have taken a "No critisism of the Democratic Party is acceptable; voters need to move to the positions of the DNC" approach.
The second camp took a "The DNC needs to be better and acknowledge it's shortcomings, and make changes when necessary. The DNC needs to align itself with DNC voters and the party base."
The first camp, for the first 8 months of 2024, insisted we had to run Joe Biden. That there were no other possibilities, options, or potential outcomes. They defended the approach the DNC took to the primary process, which was by any measure, the least democratic primary they party had ever held.
The second camp raged at the preposterous farce which was the DNC primary. They pointed out that Bidens poll numbers were so bad he basically had no chance of winning. Th
... show moreThere are no mental gymnastics, and unless you've been absent in the debate since it began in 2023, it's been one conversation regarding the direction of the Democratic party, with effectively two camps.
The first camp, effectively taking the party line and acting as cheerleaders of the DNC, have taken a "No critisism of the Democratic Party is acceptable; voters need to move to the positions of the DNC" approach.
The second camp took a "The DNC needs to be better and acknowledge it's shortcomings, and make changes when necessary. The DNC needs to align itself with DNC voters and the party base."
The first camp, for the first 8 months of 2024, insisted we had to run Joe Biden. That there were no other possibilities, options, or potential outcomes. They defended the approach the DNC took to the primary process, which was by any measure, the least democratic primary they party had ever held.
The second camp raged at the preposterous farce which was the DNC primary. They pointed out that Bidens poll numbers were so bad he basically had no chance of winning. That by insisting on this losing strategy we were losing critical time.
Bans were made, here, regarding this debate. And the first camp was wrong. There was another way possible.
After the candidates were swapped the first camp further insured that people just needed to move to where the DNC was, after taking effectively a pro genocide, Republican lite campaign philosophy as an outcome of the convention.
The second camp pointed out that this would lose the DNC the election, that we needed our focus to be on moving the candidate to a more popular, more electable position.
The first camp won the argument and lost us all the war, because their fundamental belief in what is being argued and whom they are arguing with is wrong. The first camp is responsible for the millions of votes difference between Kamala and Biden, because they insisted on this losing strategy.
fartsparkles
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •alcoholicorn
in reply to fartsparkles • • •That division is much, much older. The beltway is full of people who benefit from corporations or come from wealthy families and are materially aligned against the working class, and their ideology reflects this. These people as a group stand to lose more from the democrats moving to the left and hurting the bourgeoisie than winning than staying in the middle and losing.
This is a common dynamic historically; liberals in power need the people to maintain power, but their interests aren't aligned with the people, so they pass policies that marginalize their own base of support, and so the conservatives take power and then do counterrevolution.
Nat (she/they)
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •I'm sure the first camp exists, but you should not imply that everyone who voted Democrat and wanted people to vote Democrat was that. I did that, and I encourage everyone to criticize their horrible decisions and actions, of which there are depressingly many.
I'd love it if we pressured them to not be quite as horrible, but at the same time I did not want the Republican party to win control because I knew they'd be worse for people in almost every way. And now, as a trans person, I have to worry about what I won't be allowed to do anymore, or how they'll try to make my life worse just for existing. Sending a signal or whatever you think Democrats losing does does not justify the new shit minorities will face now.
TropicalDingdong
in reply to Nat (she/they) • • •I just want to point out, that you are making this about me as the rhetorician, when I haven't even weighed in with my position. Its not me you are arguing with when it comes to the application of strategy; its the millions of voters for whom them sacrificing their ideals to get a milquetoast Democrat, pro-genoicde, draconian border policy, democrat into office doesn't work.
This is about a basic understanding of how the table is set, and no amount of willing the environment one finds themselves in changes that. Its like '16 Hillary supporters whining about winning the popular vote. The people who were out their using the argument of "strategic voting" to shield the candidates deeply unpopular positions among democratic voters did real significant harm this election cycle. If your strategy doesn't or can't result in a specific outcome, can we really call it strategic?
My point is that the chiding of voters for not doi
... show moreI just want to point out, that you are making this about me as the rhetorician, when I haven't even weighed in with my position. Its not me you are arguing with when it comes to the application of strategy; its the millions of voters for whom them sacrificing their ideals to get a milquetoast Democrat, pro-genoicde, draconian border policy, democrat into office doesn't work.
This is about a basic understanding of how the table is set, and no amount of willing the environment one finds themselves in changes that. Its like '16 Hillary supporters whining about winning the popular vote. The people who were out their using the argument of "strategic voting" to shield the candidates deeply unpopular positions among democratic voters did real significant harm this election cycle. If your strategy doesn't or can't result in a specific outcome, can we really call it strategic?
My point is that the chiding of voters for not doing the job of the candidate is a way of morally washing ones hands of a strategy that genuinely hurt the candidates ability to get elected.
Nat (she/they)
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •Yeah, I've given some thought to what I'll do in the next election cycle, and I just don't know. I can wish that people would think like me, but I've seen enough evidence from several elections that that's not gonna happen.
That makes me feel a bit hopeless, that we're doomed to the worst politicians winning and ratcheting the US further right, and that I will not be safe to live here for a long time. I know there's organizations I can get involved with, but I really struggle to commit time to anything, and I just feel isolated from everyone (yay social atomization). I think my best bet is giving up the fight and just leaving the country.
DogWater
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •This is fucking despicable.
We have a 2 party system. Does that suck? Yes.
Should we fight to change it? Yes.
Does that give anyone an excuse for helping elect a fascist, racist, xenophobic, physchopath who is in the pocket of a foreign enemy leader by not voting for Kamala?? Fuck no. You're out of your mind.
within the context of federal elections as operated in 2024, it's certainly not the fucking fault of the people who were able to recognize that letting Putin's puppet in the office of the president for a second time to subsequently leave Ukraine to fend for itself and to ensure a genocide in Palestine was the worse of the 2 possible outcomes.
Giving in and voting center left establishment to ensure a win is a much better poison than what we have now. anyone who says otherwise is trying to "morally wash their hands" of the blood that's being spilled in Ukraine and Gaza and domestically.
The people who didn't vote because the DNC chose an establishment dem to replace Biden are narcissistic or stupid.
Trans people, gay people, immigrants
... show moreThis is fucking despicable.
We have a 2 party system. Does that suck? Yes.
Should we fight to change it? Yes.
Does that give anyone an excuse for helping elect a fascist, racist, xenophobic, physchopath who is in the pocket of a foreign enemy leader by not voting for Kamala?? Fuck no. You're out of your mind.
within the context of federal elections as operated in 2024, it's certainly not the fucking fault of the people who were able to recognize that letting Putin's puppet in the office of the president for a second time to subsequently leave Ukraine to fend for itself and to ensure a genocide in Palestine was the worse of the 2 possible outcomes.
Giving in and voting center left establishment to ensure a win is a much better poison than what we have now. anyone who says otherwise is trying to "morally wash their hands" of the blood that's being spilled in Ukraine and Gaza and domestically.
The people who didn't vote because the DNC chose an establishment dem to replace Biden are narcissistic or stupid.
Trans people, gay people, immigrants, women, elderly people on social security fixed income, 1000s of workers in industries who will face layoffs in the face of these tariffs, farmers who are losing 2 billion (40% of the food USAID gives out comes from purchases from us farmers) in USAID food purchases per year, children whose education will be forever altered will all be much happier knowing those self righteous progressives stuck to their guns and didn't compromise their morals as they get persecuted under this administration.
WELL FUCKING DONE GUYS. Don't break your arms jacking yourselves off.
TropicalDingdong
in reply to DogWater • • •You aren't arguing with me. You are arguing with the millions of people who found your rhetoric insufficient and a pro genocide stance unacceptable.
If you want to continue to be the party of "loser Democrats", just keep doing and thinking acting the same way you are presenting yourself in that comment.
When you behaved this way, when this was the rhetoric you used to convince people to vote Democrat, you did real fucking damage, and are in some small way responsible for Trump.
When your "strategy" has the obvious and demonstrated result of the opposite effect to what you want, it's not strategic.
DogWater
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •You genuinely have brain damage.
I didn't attack you in my comment did I? Unless you were one of the holdouts... I attacked them directly.
It's like a child who has been poisoned. We have the antidote in our possession but we are arguing because it happens to be a cookie. and one parent is afraid the child will feel rewarded for poisoning itself and the other wants to save the fucking child and deal with everything else after that.
TropicalDingdong
in reply to DogWater • • •You have to decide between the emotional feeling of being "right" you seem committed to, and winning elections.
You don't get to have both.
DogWater
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •It isn't hard to be right. The answer is obvious to anyone who can think.
I'm emotional about how stupid other people have acted over this election.
TropicalDingdong
in reply to DogWater • • •I mean obviously not because you still haven't caught on. Your argument, your approach to electoralism: Its why the Democrats lost. You "won" the argument from the period of January 2024 until November 2024. There are bans here, on lemmy, still in place from those who shared your view and used their power to silence challenging that strategy or narrative. Reddit too. It was ubiquitous across media.
The wages we earned on your behalf because of your complete arrogance and stupidity was Trump. And you are being singled out because you are here, but to be sure, you weren't alone in this hubris. All of mainstream media, almost all but the truly "left of the left" media outlets who were willing to go against the grain and make the obvious case that it wasn't working or going to work: All of them effectively espoused your strategy.
You (and they) wanted to the election to be something other than it was. And you were wrong, and if you were here, I and others probably told you that you were wrong. Some
... show moreI mean obviously not because you still haven't caught on. Your argument, your approach to electoralism: Its why the Democrats lost. You "won" the argument from the period of January 2024 until November 2024. There are bans here, on lemmy, still in place from those who shared your view and used their power to silence challenging that strategy or narrative. Reddit too. It was ubiquitous across media.
The wages we earned on your behalf because of your complete arrogance and stupidity was Trump. And you are being singled out because you are here, but to be sure, you weren't alone in this hubris. All of mainstream media, almost all but the truly "left of the left" media outlets who were willing to go against the grain and make the obvious case that it wasn't working or going to work: All of them effectively espoused your strategy.
You (and they) wanted to the election to be something other than it was. And you were wrong, and if you were here, I and others probably told you that you were wrong. Some talking heads went onto mainstream media and told them they were wrong (Mehdi Hassan, Sam Seder, a few others). But you all didn't fucking listen and insisted you could just "beat" the electorate into doing what you wanted, like some kind of whipped dog, while the candidate drifted further and further right, towards a non-existent center.
How many votes did you gather to vote for Harris with this approach, that you and effectively all of non-rightwing, mainstream media argued for?
Well we have the receipts. You cost us 6 million votes, or roughly 8% of Biden's 2020 vote count. Pretty much the same number as the number of Democratic voters who voted "uncommitted" as part of the protest vote during the primary, because of Gaza.
You cost us core Democratic voters because you created the permission structure for the campaign to not feel the need to get support from their core Democratic base. You didn't come at this base with rhetoric, you came at them with abuse.
You should feel fucking horrible if this was the way you conducted yourself during the 2024 election cycle, and we'll be blaming BlueMAGA/ Blue-no-matter-who for Trumps victory until the end of time.
DogWater
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •To what? The fact that most of my peers in the ultra left are posturing? That they are hypocrites? That they are okay with using thousands of lives as a bargaining chip? No, I'm pretty fucking aware of that at this point.
No, the people who were okay protesting the establishment by leaving their peers bleeding in the dirt to prove a point is why trump won. The protester holdouts who want to bitch about people like me holding them accountable and no longer being polite about it can't fucking hold a shred of moral high ground when they refused to use their voice to prevent enormous suffering. I'm convinced that you're a bot at this point.
... show moreThe only winners are the billionaires and ruling class who have successfully pushed rhetoric to polar extremes and have capitalized to insta
To what? The fact that most of my peers in the ultra left are posturing? That they are hypocrites? That they are okay with using thousands of lives as a bargaining chip? No, I'm pretty fucking aware of that at this point.
No, the people who were okay protesting the establishment by leaving their peers bleeding in the dirt to prove a point is why trump won. The protester holdouts who want to bitch about people like me holding them accountable and no longer being polite about it can't fucking hold a shred of moral high ground when they refused to use their voice to prevent enormous suffering. I'm convinced that you're a bot at this point.
The only winners are the billionaires and ruling class who have successfully pushed rhetoric to polar extremes and have capitalized to install puppets and purchased politicians.
Silencing dissenting view points isn't useful, don't lump me in with people who can and care to do that just because I'm pissed off. I'm not silencing anyone.
Not on my behalf lol I actually voted why can't you remember that???
Hubris. Wow
Imagine saying that the person in this argument who was capable of conceding to reality, dispite vehemently disagreeing with the options, and voting for Kamala....trying ensure the lesser of two evils gets into office to save other people's lives, is the one displaying hubris....rather than the person who is defending not voting to prevent the suffering....this is actual insanity, ill say it again, I actually voted. You're defending people who didn't.
What a place of privilege the protest non voters are in. They sleep at night with no risk of being bombed by Israel or Russia.
You're conflating me with some Washington DC pundit who talks down to silly little college kids who have hope. The problem is that guy happened to be right this time.
The stakes were insanely high. We had the data. We saw how bad trump was the first time with no preparation or support. and we knew that he had way more organization behind him this time.
“Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject.”
Yeah because it's crazy that people think it's okay to gamble with someone as dangerous as Trump. Normal people with a soul understood this instinctually.
Of course the media tried to tell people that this is not the time to make a well intentioned, but morally incorrect decision to not vote.
What's your fucking point
Obviously. aoc, Bernie, Jon stewart....hell, a rock.
I know, I can't believe how many people actually were willing to condemn others because they were mad at the DNC.
Oh yeah I argued till I was blue in the face with trolls and bots and hypocrites and everyone else.
It makes sense that people more in touch with the far left like Sam would try and tell left leaning MSM that their is a grass roots coalition of protesters growing.
Who is you all?? Lol
It's so clear that people on the left can't be held to a consistent moral code after watching this unfold. It's disheartening honestly. You're right, no amount of appealing to their humanity and doing quikmaffs mattered because "Democrats bad, I'll show them."
But I stand by everything. These people have blood on their hands over something that is petty and trivial in comparison. They wanted to make a stand against policies that were hurting immigrants and Palestinians so they helped elect trump by standing aside so he could turn Gaza into a resort and deport immigrants to Guantanamo. its hypocrisy, it's cruel, it's unforgivable.
Hard to say, but don't forget that all the Islamic Arabic community leaders in places like Michigan published letters laying out how important it was to not let trump win. People were trying once it was apparent there was a rift dangerous enough to lose it all.
By doing what exactly? Telling people to vote who already made their intentions known by not voting in primaries by using logical arguments to explain how those actions will hurt people worse that they claim to want to save? That's what made people not vote in the general election?? They already didn't once and Kamala was already picked.
I didn't do that, they made the choice! youre victim blaming the non voters. That's abuser logic.
LOOK WHAT YOU MADE ME NOT DO!! YOU MADE ME STAY HOME ON ELECTION DAY BY POINTING OUT THAT LESS PEOPLE WILL COME TO HARM IF I VOTE FOR THE PERSON ENDORSED BY THE ESTABLISHMENT CENTER DEMS.
What are you even talking about....
And it's a nonstarter anyway because the calculus is about trying to save people. This was a multiple choice test. There was only 1 right answer for that and people chose incorrectly for personal reasons.
And furthermore, your position depends on a static position across infinite time. AFTER Kamala would've been elected you can reapply pressure.
Protest in all the ways we can muster and guess what??? That hypothetical president is more receptive to protests and doesn't tweet shit about throwing them all in jail for wearing black masks on college campuses....
COGENT LOGICAL ARGUMENTS ARE ABUSE NOW, WE ARE COOKED CHAT
You're fucking disgusting. It would be funny if people weren't dying because of this. Your telling people who fought to minimize harm during a watershed moment for our country that they are the ones who should feel bad? Your head is so beyond fucked.
Also I'm a Bernie voter, Democratic socialist/Marxist soooooo miss me with that blue maga shit.
TropicalDingdong
in reply to DogWater • • •Would you rather "be right", in the sense of your rhetorical and applied framing, or have Harris win the election?
You have to pick. Because you won the argument on how to approach the issue, at least for period of almost all of the period of 2024 that mattered. The world agreed with you. Your world view was precisely how almost all talking heads on addressed the issue. That voters needed to get over it. That voters needed to "vote strategically".
But it lost us the election. You won the round to lose the match. The hubris is you blaming anyone but yourself.
You have a choice. You can continue to "be right", in your mind, about how to approach rhetoric and electoralism, but you will not win elections.
Alternatively, you can change your mind, and reproach your strategy in terms of what it takes to win elections, both in rhetoric and approach to electoralism.
You can't have both. You have to decide.
DogWater
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •TropicalDingdong
in reply to DogWater • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •Maybe democrats want to lose. Why else would they not invite 3rd parties to participate of equal footing. Why would they say no to multiple chances at beating the republicans? Why would they say no to increased voter participation and the free votes that come along side that.
Where is the urgency during the election? Where is the urgency now? Do they not believe what they've been saying about the republicans this whole time?
DogWater
in reply to UltraGiGaGigantic • • •3rd parties cannibalize votes from which ever majority party it aligns closest with. That's the problem with our system. Your comment makes no sense I'm the context of current voting rules.
Ranked choice voting would help immensely and then your tongue in cheek rhetorical questions would make sense, but until then the answer is obvious. The Dems don't want that because it takes votes from them.
NSRXN
in reply to fartsparkles • • •That's what this meme does.
ceenote
in reply to Jo Miran • • •MagicShel
in reply to ceenote • • •Addv4
in reply to MagicShel • • •RedditRefugee69
in reply to Addv4 • • •Unfortunately it may have.
A lot of voters are stupid. They see Israel=Bad, Biden/Kamala = pro-Israel, they stay home.
Addv4
in reply to RedditRefugee69 • • •FinnFooted
in reply to Addv4 • • •Democrats are pragmatically there for the money. They aren't comically evil, but they are corrupt. They will throw an election before they ever give up AIPAC money and count on the next election swinging back to them. They get to sit back and watch the republicans be the bad guys and stir shit up for a few years. Then, when they get back in power, they fix the things that's don't make them money and look like he good guys but conveniently leave the unpopular policy the republicans enacted that makes them money and they don't have to look like the bad guys. They just look incompetent. But they aren't. This is all very purposeful. They love this dynamic. They benifit from it.
The democrats as they are for sure need to go. But we need to be more pragmatic ourselves about removing them instead of throwing elections to the republicans hoping it will teach the Democrats a lesson. Because it won't. We need to focus on getting a foothold and changing the party. And that means turning out to vote in every election no matter what. Vote third party. Vote write in. Vote whatever. But si
... show moreDemocrats are pragmatically there for the money. They aren't comically evil, but they are corrupt. They will throw an election before they ever give up AIPAC money and count on the next election swinging back to them. They get to sit back and watch the republicans be the bad guys and stir shit up for a few years. Then, when they get back in power, they fix the things that's don't make them money and look like he good guys but conveniently leave the unpopular policy the republicans enacted that makes them money and they don't have to look like the bad guys. They just look incompetent. But they aren't. This is all very purposeful. They love this dynamic. They benifit from it.
The democrats as they are for sure need to go. But we need to be more pragmatic ourselves about removing them instead of throwing elections to the republicans hoping it will teach the Democrats a lesson. Because it won't. We need to focus on getting a foothold and changing the party. And that means turning out to vote in every election no matter what. Vote third party. Vote write in. Vote whatever. But sitting out of elections to teach democrats a lesson just isn't going to do anything. It's just throwing away the small amount of political capital most people have. If we don't vote now its either corporate feudalism or civil war in the future.
RedditRefugee69
in reply to FinnFooted • • •Yeah I think they've realized over the decades that the needle swings like a metronome whether they try or not, especially thanks to obstructionists like Mitch McConnell ensuring trying won't go anywhere.
So they cash their paycheck, occasionally show up for votes, and play the stock market with knowledge they gain from privileged information.
MagicShel
in reply to RedditRefugee69 • • •I don't think so. Not that I have anything better to offer. My wife thinks Biden would've won because too many people stayed home, refusing to vote for a black woman. I, frankly, think the election was about the economy. If you look back over the elections, they are almost always about how people are doing financially. If they are scared or hurting, they will vote for change. If they are happy, they vote for the incumbent. My honest opinion is that there wasn't a scenario or candidate that would've changed Trump's victory.
What I am sure of is that in all of the states where Trump won (even Michigan), if every single person who withheld their vote due to Israel/Gaza had voted for Kamala, that wouldn't have been enough by itself to change the outcome. Certainly, that issue had an effect, but it didn't change the outcome by itself. We have to look beyond that.
But, still, if you did withhold your vote thinking you were fighting for Gaza, yeah I think you deserve to have your nose rubbed in that shit.
Jo Miran
in reply to MagicShel • • •Prunebutt
in reply to MagicShel • • •MagicShel
in reply to Prunebutt • • •TropicalDingdong
in reply to ceenote • • •EldritchFeminity
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •No, they were never going to do that. They've already said that they learned their lesson, and in 2026, they're gonna double down on the losing strategy that they've been running since Clinton was in office and run on building the wall on the Mexican border and deporting immigrants to court the moderate Republican vote that doesn't exist and never would vote for them even if it did.
By the Presidential election, it's already years too late to force them to actually do good things. Protest votes and withholding your vote have done nothing to stop the slide that led to Harris campaigning with Liz Cheney in tow in the 16 years that I've been voting. If you want change, it's only going to come by threatening the position of the people in charge of the party and replacing the old guard with people like AOC. Whoever gets elected President does neither of those things. Unless Krasnov declares the Democratic Party a terrorist organization and has them all arrested as political prisoners. But then we won't have to worry about voting ever again, just like he promised.
TropicalDingdong
in reply to EldritchFeminity • • •A few things.
Firstly, we can dismiss the notion that the candidate can't be moved. The citation for that is Biden in 2020, who effectively campaigned during the primary as a moderate Republican, and until the southern states which we're never going to go blue anyways weighed in, was getting his ass handed to him. The Sunday before Super Tuesday, the rat-fuckening, Oblivious Warren. All that old history.
And then something remarkable happened. Biden opened the doors to the tent and invited the progressive wing of the party in. He handed the Bernie-crats the platform and said "have at it hoss". And it worked. Instead of disenfranchising the activist base, he embraced them, or at least, extended an olive branch by giving them the platform, without which he assuredly would have lost.
So: Candidates can be moved.
Second:
... show moreA few things.
Firstly, we can dismiss the notion that the candidate can't be moved. The citation for that is Biden in 2020, who effectively campaigned during the primary as a moderate Republican, and until the southern states which we're never going to go blue anyways weighed in, was getting his ass handed to him. The Sunday before Super Tuesday, the rat-fuckening, Oblivious Warren. All that old history.
And then something remarkable happened. Biden opened the doors to the tent and invited the progressive wing of the party in. He handed the Bernie-crats the platform and said "have at it hoss". And it worked. Instead of disenfranchising the activist base, he embraced them, or at least, extended an olive branch by giving them the platform, without which he assuredly would have lost.
So: Candidates can be moved.
Second:
Again. And I'm singling you out because you responded and well, here we are. This is an obtuse, bordering on bad faith interpretation of the argument being made. You aren't arguing with me. You are arguing with the millions of voters who stayed home for Kamala but showed up for Biden. And you moralizing about an objectively misguided application of strategic voting didn't/ doesn't/ won't/ change their votes. When your "strategic voting" strategy results in losing you the election, explain to me how and why its strategic?
You don't/ can't move millions of voters to a new position. Or at least it hasn't been shown to be possible (2016, 2024). Asking voters to "vote against" instead of "voting for" doesn't work and we now have so many receipts, that they will write text books on the matter. What can be done, is that the candidate can be moved. Its also been shown through an evidentiary process to work.
To summarize, candidates can be moved. Biden moved and won an election because of it. When you moralize about your own, demonstrated-to-be-wrong conception of strategic voting, you aren't arguing with me, you are arguing with the literally millions of people left on the table by the Democrats. A strategy that when examined before hand will clearly lose, the insistence of then implementing it becomes a "burn the world down" moralization to wash your own hands: Democratic voters who reliably show up, but did not, because the DNC got a hall pass from those making the exact arguments you are making here. They did not need to respond to criticism because this argument you are making shielded them. And it cost us all, practically everything.
alcoholicorn
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •Further evidence that the democrats can be moved if we don't let them maintain the delusion they can win while trying to be republicans: The entire party told Biden to drop out when it was clear he had no path to victory.
Sadly Kamala was allowed to believe she could win while embracing the same policies and messaging that killed the Biden campaign. Instead of screaming at the party to campaign on overwhelmingly popular left policy necessary to win the election and use every power at the democrat's disposal to accomplish it, blue MAGA told anyone pointing out that we're headed back towards the waterfall to shut up and paddle harder.
givesomefucks
in reply to ceenote • • •Yep, I voted D like I always did...
But I spent a lot of time ringing any alarm bell I could find that all of Joe and Kamal's moves to the right was gonna cost us the election, and that the victory fund would lose the House and Senate.
I was right on all counts, but the people I was trying to explain it won't admit that reality proved them wrong.
There's no criticism for what the party did wrong, only anger at anyone with higher standards than the letter by the name.
Neoliberals want nothing as much as they want blindly loyal Dem voters, it's the only way most people ever hold their noses and vote for one. But rather than have a candidate dem voters want, they'd rather risk trump.
When they shut on voters like in that meme, they're telling us they have zero problem watching the country burn. They'd rather have trump than a Dem who agrees with Dem voters.
cosmicrookie
in reply to ceenote • • •The Bard in Green
in reply to ceenote • • •lobut
in reply to The Bard in Green • • •leadore
in reply to lobut • • •EldritchFeminity
in reply to lobut • • •TrickDacy
in reply to ceenote • • •corsicanguppy
in reply to ceenote • • •If you look carefully, you'll find statements about how "neither option affects [this particular thing] but we have the best chance of fixing it after the election if we still have a country".
It was never handwaved. It was the least-worse option with some kind of hope given that issue and a thousand others. How many times this has fucking been fucking explained and not fucking understood.
YarHarSuperstar
in reply to corsicanguppy • • •Uh yes it was definitely hand-waved away by some "if you look carefully". It was only the "least-worse option" because so many were successfully manipulated by the system into being placated with crumbs so they wouldn't revolt at the thousands of other reasons we've had for years to fight back against this shit, pushing the Overton window to the right in increments and leading folks to not use or even possess or be taught in the first place the critical thinking skills required to inform oneself and take steps to make positive change, in this system designed to intentionally misinform and mislead us and pit us against each other so we vote for the same rich white men responsible for perpetuating this system and the harm it brings to all of us, especially marginalized communities.
I would recommend to you (and anyone who is interested in informing themselves on what is being done to us) to read "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein. It details this process of incremental change, and some of the strategies and parties previously and currently involved in taking control of our go
... show moreUh yes it was definitely hand-waved away by some "if you look carefully". It was only the "least-worse option" because so many were successfully manipulated by the system into being placated with crumbs so they wouldn't revolt at the thousands of other reasons we've had for years to fight back against this shit, pushing the Overton window to the right in increments and leading folks to not use or even possess or be taught in the first place the critical thinking skills required to inform oneself and take steps to make positive change, in this system designed to intentionally misinform and mislead us and pit us against each other so we vote for the same rich white men responsible for perpetuating this system and the harm it brings to all of us, especially marginalized communities.
I would recommend to you (and anyone who is interested in informing themselves on what is being done to us) to read "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein. It details this process of incremental change, and some of the strategies and parties previously and currently involved in taking control of our government (or at this point more like what's left of it).
(For clarity: I'm not saying both parties are the same, although their goals, tactics, and policies seem less different to me as time passes; I'm not making any general statement passing blame to any group of voters or non-voters in this comment, because I believe the bulk of the responsibility lies on the system and those who hold sway over large parts of it in the form of currency or legislation, for example; I'm not denying or invalidating that you may feel this way and/or believe it is true, I'm taking issue with your statement that "it was never handwaved", because I most certainly saw that happen and know people who to this day are clinging to that sentiment; I'm not saying harm reduction isn't the move or good policy, it is but there has to simultaneously be work being done on reducing or removing the source of that harm)
Edit: sorry for run-on sentences. working on it gradually and open to feedback
DarkFuture
in reply to ceenote • • •They're already 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000x better than Republicans. So someone would have to be pretty goddamn stupid not to vote for them when the options are them or Republicans.
The majority of the fault isn't on Democrats. It's on goddamn stupid braindead asshole American voters for being goddamn stupid braindead assholes.
NSRXN
in reply to DarkFuture • • •how can this be quantified?
rational_lib
in reply to ceenote • • •I'd like to believe you're right, but given who won the election I'm forced to disagree - hand-waiving away valid criticisms, along with all responsibilities of all kinds, while making the most wildly invalid criticisms of others seems to be a great way to win elections.
This isn't just being pedantic. If you just say democrats have to address all valid concerns, it's putting them at a political disadvantage because some valid concerns can't be addressed without losing. Democrats are in a tough spot anytime there's a crisis in Israel because Muslims and Jews both vote democrat when they're not pissed off. Both groups heavily shifted towards Trump this election. Because both groups contain large numbers of people who, like other people, tend to be shockingly bad at doing what's rational when they're having emotions.
Point is, as much as Kamala failed to stop Trump and that falls on her, cut her some slack on the Israel-Palestine thing because it's hard being attacked from all sides by emotional zombies who won't listen to reason. There's no right decisions to be made.
lorty
in reply to Jo Miran • • •NotMushroomForDebate
in reply to Jo Miran • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to NotMushroomForDebate • • •crusa187
in reply to Jo Miran • • •Nobody pushing genocide is worthy of votes or support.
It was incumbent on Dems to EARN votes, and they failed spectacularly. You’re wrong to try blaming voters for failings of our corrupt politicians.
Taldan
in reply to crusa187 • • •Will you still be saying that when Trump puts a resort in Gaza?
Trump has made it crystal clear: He plans for the complete and total ethnuc cleansing of Gaza. All Palestinians will be killed or removed
That's what Arab and Palestinian Americans chose when they voted for Trump
UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to Taldan • • •Yes. Will you refuse to demand electoral reform in your state so the people of this nation can vote outside the two party system without a spoiler effect? Will you refuse to do anything about those who are without representation? Will you refuse democracy?
m532
in reply to Taldan • • •So according to you, the palestinians voted for trump and therefore deserve to be genocided???
Tell me, how exactly would arab and palestinian people have been able to vote for trump? And why would they do that?
Of course you dont have proof either because votes are secret, so, because you suspect some palestinians of voting for trump you want them all genocided???
DogWater
in reply to crusa187 • • •snugglesthefalse
in reply to crusa187 • • •houseofleft
in reply to Jo Miran • • •I'm not American so nobody got my vote, but seems to me like the issue is with the swathes of people choosing facism rather than progressives who chose not to vote.
Choosing how to act in a world like ours is tricky, anyone following a sense of right and wrong (even if I disagree with their judgement) instead of fear, hate, greed or whatever gets a gold star in my book.
EldritchFeminity
in reply to houseofleft • • •Inaction is still a choice, though. I totally understand the sentiment behind that choice and even agree that we shouldn't be forced to choose genocide, but the alternative that we got is a man who not only wants the same genocide, but wants to accelerate it, put American boots on the ground to assist in it, and then turn the bloodied ground into resorts while also wanting to worsen life across the globe. So, by refusing to act, they didn't oppose that man getting into power. They cared so much about genocide that, ironically, they enabled making that genocide worse by not acting against that possibility.
The biggest issue, though, is with the people who couldn't be bothered enough to vote. Some, what, 40% of Americans never vote? Of course, there's plenty there who can't due to things like gerrymandering, but there's a huge swathe of white suburbanites who simply prefer the status quo to actually improving things.
NSRXN
in reply to EldritchFeminity • • •you can refuse to vote for a Democrat and still oppose the man getting into power.
EldritchFeminity
in reply to NSRXN • • •But thanks to the two party system, what effect does it have? And I'm specifically talking about the voting day of the presidential election here, not primaries or other elections. Because that's where those efforts will have the most impact. Not that the Dems deigned to give us even the illusion of a primary this election (or in 2016, truthfully), but so many of these people seem to shake their fist once every 4 years and then go to sleep like cicadas awaiting the next presidential election.
I don't blame people for hating the weak candidates that the Dems consistently push forward to maintain the old guards' leadership positions, but I do blame them for looking at the alternative and saying "I'm okay with the possibility of that man winning if I don't vote or vote third party." The chance of a Trump victory and all that it entailed was a line in the sand that they were willing to cross.
As a trans woman, I blame them for saying, "Your life is not worth biting the bullet for."
NSRXN
in reply to EldritchFeminity • • •whether I vote for Dems or no, I'm not ok with republican candidates.
NSRXN
in reply to EldritchFeminity • • •that chance was thrust upon all of us. accepting reality doesn't make him acceptable.
nickwitha_k (he/him)
in reply to NSRXN • • •NSRXN
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •support your claim
nickwitha_k (he/him)
in reply to NSRXN • • •Suppose there are 10 people eligible to vote.
3 of them are known to support a fascist and will vote, no matter what. They have religious figures reminding them and pressuring them to vote for the fascist and watch propaganda daily that maintains their outrage and support.
1 of them is a big supporter of the neolibs and will vote for them no matter what.
1 of them is a pragmatic leftist who grudgingly will vote for the neolibs because there is no other viable choice.
1 of them is undecided either because they don't think fascism is that bad, or think it won't impact them, or don't consider how it could impact people who are not as privileged as them, etc.
The other 4 are:
That's 6/10 eligible voting (in line with the proportion of eligible voters that voted in 2024).
Further, histo
... show moreSuppose there are 10 people eligible to vote.
3 of them are known to support a fascist and will vote, no matter what. They have religious figures reminding them and pressuring them to vote for the fascist and watch propaganda daily that maintains their outrage and support.
1 of them is a big supporter of the neolibs and will vote for them no matter what.
1 of them is a pragmatic leftist who grudgingly will vote for the neolibs because there is no other viable choice.
1 of them is undecided either because they don't think fascism is that bad, or think it won't impact them, or don't consider how it could impact people who are not as privileged as them, etc.
The other 4 are:
That's 6/10 eligible voting (in line with the proportion of eligible voters that voted in 2024).
Further, historical data shows that when fewer people vote, the fascists win because of their dedication to their cause and authority figures coaxing them to do so. This data is readily available in terms that are easy to comprehend, even for those without technical or scientific education.
So, the breakdown is:
Fascism: 3
Neolibs: 2 or 3
Coin toss on whether the fascists win, because, of those deigning to engage in the electoral system, one of them is not convinced that opposing fascism is really that big of a deal.
What about third parties? They don't matter in this but because it is first-past-the-post and only a majority of participating voters is required.
But, the majority of polled people support left-of-center policies! Why are we forced to vote for neolibs?! Doesn't matter. 4 out of 10 eligible voters are going to vote in support of right-of-center ideologies. If more eligible voters voted, that wouldn't be an issue and the voice of the majority would be heard. But, between apathy, voter suppression, and the anti-electoralist/accelerationist cult, 40% are not voting. And that's still "good" compared to the last half-century.
So, there you go. Barely even scratching statistics and simple to digest as to why voters who refused to do their duty to oppose fascism share the responsibility with the neolibs.
NSRXN
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •nickwitha_k (he/him)
in reply to NSRXN • • •NSRXN
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •nickwitha_k (he/him)
in reply to NSRXN • • •Simplified: 3 > (1+1) but 3 < (1+1+1+1)
Questions?
NSRXN
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •nickwitha_k (he/him)
in reply to NSRXN • • •It is vitally important, not just in elections but also in life overall, to recognize that not all possibilities are equally likely and to use available data to evaluate them.
For example, it is possible that a white rhinoceros might come down the hall and join me for a spot of tea and biscuits. I can, however, safely say that that is almost definitely not going to happen, based upon these data points:
Yes, this is a exaggerated caricature. However, data with even more clarity is available surrounding election outcomes. Betting on
... show moreIt is vitally important, not just in elections but also in life overall, to recognize that not all possibilities are equally likely and to use available data to evaluate them.
For example, it is possible that a white rhinoceros might come down the hall and join me for a spot of tea and biscuits. I can, however, safely say that that is almost definitely not going to happen, based upon these data points:
Yes, this is a exaggerated caricature. However, data with even more clarity is available surrounding election outcomes. Betting on a possible outcome without any evidence to suggest that it is likely is foolish and betting on an outcome that one knows is unlikely, while increasing the likelihood of an outcome known to be harmful to vulnerable people is detestable.
NSRXN
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •m532
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •NSRXN
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •prove it
nickwitha_k (he/him)
in reply to NSRXN • • •NSRXN
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •nickwitha_k (he/him)
in reply to NSRXN • • •NSRXN
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •nickwitha_k (he/him)
in reply to NSRXN • • •NSRXN
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •nickwitha_k (he/him)
in reply to NSRXN • • •NSRXN
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to nickwitha_k (he/him) • • •nickwitha_k (he/him)
in reply to UltraGiGaGigantic • • •Here, we have some agreement and common ground. Now is indeed a much better time to try for change than a general election. However, with fascists in power, free elections are likely to no longer occur for the foreseeable future. So, demanding resistance from elected officials and building community is vital to weathering this storm that was avoidable.
Now. I see that you have not responded to my request for what you have done, after my response to your accusatory question. Care to do so? Or are you just JAQing it?
NSRXN
in reply to EldritchFeminity • • •I don't believe voting for Democrats is an effective way to save anyone's life.
UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to EldritchFeminity • • •Sounds like First-past-the-post voting doesn't properly represent the population. Let's try a new electoral system to fix this. The people of Alaska switched to Ranked Choice and they had a referendum last election to go back to FPTP voting, and they didn't want to.
::: spoiler Videos on alternative voting systems
youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiy… (What most states use now)
Videos on alternative electoral systems we can try out.
STAR voting
youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8Hs…
Ranked Choice voting
youtube.com/watch?v=e3GFG0sXIi…
Single Transferable Vote
youtube.com/watch?v=QT0I-sdoSX…
:::
EldritchFeminity
in reply to UltraGiGaGigantic • • •lobut
in reply to Jo Miran • • •I feel a lot of people do a lot to justify stupid behaviour. "Saving is too hard" or "exercise is too hard". There's legit reasons to not be able to save, or exercise or being able to vote 🤨.
However there's a lot of bullshit that people were spouting. It's either a coordinated campaign or just dumb shit. What annoys me is everyone piling on Joe and then they did what people wanted and swapped to Kamala and they're still upset that the Dems "don't listen". Whatever, they're all full of it.
I fucking hate the Democrats but you have to be completely psycho to justify not-voting for them.
To be clear, I'm Canadian and I'm directly impacted by this now. So fuck all of those people.
Nat (she/they)
in reply to Jo Miran • • •Drewfro66
in reply to Jo Miran • • •DarkFuture
in reply to Jo Miran • • •Jo Miran
in reply to DarkFuture • • •Nasan
in reply to DarkFuture • • •NSRXN
in reply to Nasan • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to Jo Miran • • •While I did vote blue conservative (for the last time), they were not worthy of that vote because they did not represent me. That's how representative democracy works. What you advocate for is not representative democracy, it is a hostage situation and should be treated like the crisis that that entails.
Why are you okay with people being underrepresented at the voting booth? Are you actively working to replace First Past the Post voting in your state? People should have the freedom to vote for the candidates they believe are best, while still ensuring their votes count against those they don’t want in office.
It's not as though democrats are just now learning of the mathematical flaws of FPTP. Every election I've seen the same bullshit excuses to take people's inalienable right to vote how they want. Democrats in blue states made a choice to leave a huge portion of the population unrepresented, all for safe states and easy elections.
We don’t need to wait for a miracle from Congress, we can pass election reform one state at a time. Should we have mor
... show moreWhile I did vote blue conservative (for the last time), they were not worthy of that vote because they did not represent me. That's how representative democracy works. What you advocate for is not representative democracy, it is a hostage situation and should be treated like the crisis that that entails.
Why are you okay with people being underrepresented at the voting booth? Are you actively working to replace First Past the Post voting in your state? People should have the freedom to vote for the candidates they believe are best, while still ensuring their votes count against those they don’t want in office.
It's not as though democrats are just now learning of the mathematical flaws of FPTP. Every election I've seen the same bullshit excuses to take people's inalienable right to vote how they want. Democrats in blue states made a choice to leave a huge portion of the population unrepresented, all for safe states and easy elections.
We don’t need to wait for a miracle from Congress, we can pass election reform one state at a time. Should we have more elections, we must remove the democratic monopoly on this fight against the republicans. Don't worry, blue conservative, you will be free to vote for your preference under a more representative electoral system. Because who would want to deny someone the right to vote for the person they feel is best? You apparently.
Alaska has already abolished FPTP voting. After Ranked Choice Voting kept Sarah Palin out of office, Alaskan Republicans tried to pass a referendum to revert to FPTP, but the people voted to keep Ranked Choice. Why would you want to use the same voting system that Republicans favor? Do you support democracy, or do you get off on forcing people unrepresented in government to vote for your preference?
::: spoiler Videos on alternative voting systems
youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiy… (What most states use now)
Videos on alternative electoral systems we can try out.
STAR voting
youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8Hs…
Ranked Choice voting
youtube.com/watch?v=e3GFG0sXIi…
Single Transferable Vote
youtube.com/watch?v=QT0I-sdoSX…
:::
DragonsInARoom
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
hitstun likes this.
illi
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
magic_lobster_party likes this.
mmddmm
in reply to illi • • •This is something that only the Judiciary can declare (by failing to do anything), so I think it takes more than a few weeks.
But the Executive sure is working towards it.
truthfultemporarily
in reply to mmddmm • • •theroofisonfire
in reply to fossilesque • • •shoulderoforion
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
shoulderoforion and Fitik like this.
MudMan
in reply to shoulderoforion • • •I mean, fuck antisemitism in any form, obviously...
...but I'm going to say "allow fascists to eliminate freedom of protest" has a spotty track record improving that particular issue.
This guy is in power in no small part due to whatever definition for not-fascist Americans you want to use not showing up because they feel compromise is beneath them. Maybe it's time to learn that lesson.
Well, no, the time to learn that lesson was November. I guess it's finding out time. For people too rightfully indignant about the genocide in Gaza to look past their own noses and to people in your situation alike, I'm afraid.
like this
hitstun likes this.
missingno
in reply to shoulderoforion • • •"We should repeal the First Amendment because I don't like it when protestors support Palestine."
It's hard to take your claims seriously when you have a history of twisting and misinterpreting any pro-Palestine anything as if it was a personal attack directly at you.
like this
ElcaineVolta likes this.
ElcaineVolta
in reply to shoulderoforion • • •fossilesque
in reply to shoulderoforion • • •Mod reminder to keep it civil and no personal attacks when you reply to this. This person has had bad experiences, remember the human. Please report any personal attacks.
PS: Remember, if you want to convince people you need to meet them where they are. This person is your neighbor, not your enemy.
like this
shoulderoforion and hitstun like this.
brucethemoose
in reply to shoulderoforion • • •This position is interesting. It's echoed in articles like:
jewishjournal.com/culture/firs…
... show moreAnd they assert this bit of history as evidence:
This position is interesting. It's echoed in articles like:
jewishjournal.com/culture/firs…
And they assert this bit of history as evidence:
To me, it sounds like the argument is being framed as "us" Jews and "them" Jews making the mistake of trying to homogenize. That's tremendously ironic, as this type of thinking is exactly what led them to support Nazi Germany. The exact kind of language Trump use, aggressive, bombastic pursuit of "agitators" as undesirables, of ignoring antisemites and bigots Trump associates himself with, of dismissing his speech as a "rhetorical tool," is what German Jewish groups believed would protect them... Until Nazis came for them, too.
Maybe antisemetic violence should be curbed, but you should consider what's actually causing it, and how that "curbing" will be done.
When the Chicken Votes for Colonel Sanders
Rabbi Michael Barclay (Jewish Journal)shoulderoforion
in reply to brucethemoose • • •like this
shoulderoforion and Fitik like this.
vatlark
in reply to shoulderoforion • • •I'm sure it must be a stressful time for Jewish people. All hate crime is horrible. Many people, Jewish and non-Jewish, oppose the actions of Israel.
I do hope the protests, to stop US arms being sent to Israel, grow in strength. And I do what I can personally to help.
When looking at the numbers its no exaggeration to say that the Palestinian people are being slaughtered by the Israel military.
- On October 7, 2023 Israel was attacked killing 1200 Israelis. Israel's response to the attack has been completely disproportionate and has now (as of June 2024) killed over 7,797 children. In the same time the conflict killed 53 children in Israel.
- The most conservative estimate is that 7,797 Palestinian children have been killed, in the same time it is estimated that the total Israeli casualties; including military and civilian, including men, women, and children is 1200.
- on April 24, 2024 with many thousands of Palestinian children already dead, the US gave 14 billion in aid to Israel
- Neither US political party is stopping this.
Here are my sources,
... show moreI'm sure it must be a stressful time for Jewish people. All hate crime is horrible. Many people, Jewish and non-Jewish, oppose the actions of Israel.
I do hope the protests, to stop US arms being sent to Israel, grow in strength. And I do what I can personally to help.
When looking at the numbers its no exaggeration to say that the Palestinian people are being slaughtered by the Israel military.
- On October 7, 2023 Israel was attacked killing 1200 Israelis. Israel's response to the attack has been completely disproportionate and has now (as of June 2024) killed over 7,797 children. In the same time the conflict killed 53 children in Israel.
- The most conservative estimate is that 7,797 Palestinian children have been killed, in the same time it is estimated that the total Israeli casualties; including military and civilian, including men, women, and children is 1200.
- on April 24, 2024 with many thousands of Palestinian children already dead, the US gave 14 billion in aid to Israel
- Neither US political party is stopping this.
Here are my sources, I am always interested to have other sources.
May 2024 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said 30,000 time.com/6979208/israel-gaza-d…
The Gaza Ministry of Health said that 36,379 people had been killed by the end of May 2024, apnews.com/article/israel-hama…
The associated press reported 40,005 in August 2024. apnews.com/article/israel-hama…
hamas officials say 6000 to 8000 reuters.com/world/middle-east/… time.com/6979208/israel-gaza-d…
Netanyahu says 14,000 combatants time.com/6979208/israel-gaza-d…
of those killed 58 to 48% were women and children jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/art…
of 24,686 identified casualties: 7,797 children (32%), 4,959 women (20%), 1,924 elderly (8%) unocha.org/publications/report…
Netanyahu said "probably around 16,000 civilians have been killed" politifact.com/article/2024/ma…
1,200 in israel plus 320 israeli combatants in Gaza unocha.org/publications/report…
1,200 in the oct 7 2023 attack timesofisrael.com/israel-revis…
318 of the 1,200 killed in the oct 7 2023 attack were combatants: timesofisrael.com/israel-revis…
of the 1,162 identified fatalities, at least 33 were children unocha.org/publications/report…
53 children killed in israel apnews.com/article/israel-hama…
What we can and can’t know about the death toll in Gaza
@politifactBonifratz
in reply to shoulderoforion • • •Friendly reminder that Trump refused to condemn a group of white supremacists chanting "Jews will not replace us".
He is not on your side. And, if history is any indication, allowing government to control speech and expression by fascist means is much more dangerous to Jews than any group of student protesters could ever be.
like this
missingno and MudMan like this.
macisr
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
hitstun likes this.
TropicalDingdong
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness and hitstun like this.
Olorin
in reply to TropicalDingdong • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness, hitstun and felixthecat like this.
TropicalDingdong
in reply to Olorin • • •Maybe. If it resists. If it fails to resist it will be turned into an institution responsible for communicating a fascist ideology.
Hatshepsut
in reply to fossilesque • • •Camera-shy hoodie
We need something like this for daytime.
Also, read up on what they are ultimately going for: Eliminating the First Amendment
The Camera Shy Hoodie — Mac Pierce
Mac Piercelike this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
pivot_root
in reply to Hatshepsut • • •Trump supporters: "that's fine, the president isn't congress"
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
smokin_shinobi
in reply to fossilesque • • •𝗧𝗼𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 *𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
hitstun and Quantumantics like this.
Emerald
in reply to 𝗧𝗼𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 *𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 • • •VodkaSolution
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
hitstun and Quantumantics like this.
Jo Miran
in reply to VodkaSolution • • •magic_lobster_party
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Quantumantics likes this.
HexesofVexes
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
hitstun likes this.
BigMacHole
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
RubberElectrons
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
hitstun and NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
something_random_tho
in reply to fossilesque • • •This happened before: en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Sophie…
Wikimedia disambiguation page
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)like this
NoneOfUrBusiness and FartsWithAnAccent like this.
fossilesque
in reply to something_random_tho • • •She's bae.
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
Match!!
in reply to something_random_tho • • •brbposting
in reply to something_random_tho • • •RIP hero
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
rockerface 🇺🇦
in reply to something_random_tho • • •usernamesAreTricky
in reply to fossilesque • • •1st ammendment to the constitution since conservatives love to claim they support it
Letstakealook
in reply to usernamesAreTricky • • •SkaveRat
in reply to Letstakealook • • •Contramuffin
in reply to Letstakealook • • •The constitution also didn't say "the president shall give a shit about the law"
Rookie mistake, IMO
RandomVideos
in reply to Contramuffin • • •Cethin
in reply to RandomVideos • • •grue
in reply to Contramuffin • • •It literally did, minus your contemporary idiom:
(It's called the "take care clause" and is part of Article II, Section 3, in case anybody wants to look it up.)
Not that it matters anymore, after Trump v. United States.
TrickDacy
in reply to usernamesAreTricky • • •Jo Miran
in reply to usernamesAreTricky • • •Obinice
in reply to usernamesAreTricky • • •Jesus_666
in reply to usernamesAreTricky • • •jjjalljs
in reply to usernamesAreTricky • • •Laws only matter if they are enforced.
The right wing doesn't care about law or consistency. They care about in-groups to protect and out groups to bind.
If "how do treat strangers" is a viable metric for assessing if someone is a good person or not, the the right wing are not good people.
leadore
in reply to usernamesAreTricky • • •SoleInvictus
in reply to leadore • • •chiliedogg
in reply to usernamesAreTricky • • •errer
in reply to fossilesque • • •lostbit
in reply to fossilesque • • •Grizzlyboy
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
alykanas
in reply to Grizzlyboy • • •like this
Quantumantics and NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
johsny
in reply to fossilesque • • •rustyfish
in reply to fossilesque • • •Look at what happens when you don’t burn the fascist the moment it pops up. It will get worse and then even more worse.
I wish the non-mouth breathing half of the US the best of luck.
like this
Shawdow194, Quantumantics and NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
RedSeries (She/Her)
in reply to fossilesque • • •Zombie-Mantis
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
fakeman_pretendname, Shawdow194 and NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
SkaveRat
in reply to Zombie-Mantis • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
Zombie-Mantis
in reply to SkaveRat • • •DarkFuture
in reply to Zombie-Mantis • • •Californian here.
We should stop paying federal taxes.
We have a ton of money, a ton of military installations, and 1 in 8 Americans IS a Californian. Washington and Oregon join us, and we'd be in even better shape. Canada can get in on the action too.
A felon rapist traitor and his traitor party is making our Constitution irrelevant. Time to start looking out for ourselves.
like this
Shawdow194, Quantumantics and NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
mojofrododojo
in reply to DarkFuture • • •WA state here - it's ridiculous that I have to subsidize chuds in Mississippi and Louisiana when they won't even give their citizens human rights. they're all about fiscal responsibility until it comes to paying their own fucking bills.
edit: love the chudvotes, do we have some cranky MS and LA types? pay your fucking bills jerkfaces. fuck, half your budgets come from federal funds we pour more into.
like this
Quantumantics, FartsWithAnAccent and NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
alcoholicorn
in reply to mojofrododojo • • •ayyy
in reply to alcoholicorn • • •didnt1able
in reply to ayyy • • •Maggoty
in reply to ayyy • • •alcoholicorn
in reply to Maggoty • • •Maggoty
in reply to alcoholicorn • • •In one specific economic theory.
I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm pointing out that it's a whole debate.
InFerNo
in reply to DarkFuture • • •ayyy
in reply to InFerNo • • •dontpanic
in reply to ayyy • • •MonkeMischief
in reply to InFerNo • • •"But I em le' tiiiired..."
"Zen take a nap...ZEN FIRE ZE MISSLEZ!!"
ayyy
in reply to DarkFuture • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
Zombie-Mantis
in reply to DarkFuture • • •Pandasdontfly
in reply to DarkFuture • • •OmegaMan
in reply to Zombie-Mantis • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
Tattorack
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
fakeman_pretendname and NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
Bakkoda
in reply to Tattorack • • •ameancow
in reply to Tattorack • • •He didn't win by being consistent. Hypocrisy is WHY people voted for him. They thought he was the only one who would "do the hard things" by being cruel to the people who are hurting everyone. That's the narrative at least, and while you can literally write libraries on the flaws, inconsistencies and logical discrepancies in Trump and the Republican narratives, the fact remains that most people are vulnerable to storylines.
Not moral flaws. Not character. Not record or experience. The only thing people largely, as a group, care about is JUST how someone makes them feel in that moment. And a lot of poorly educated, mentally unwell people saw and heard Trump lying to the people they believe were the cause of all our woes, and that's why they voted for him.
If we ever want another democracy that works, we have to understand that our population is genetically and physically identical to the beings who were clubbing each other's heads in during ten thousand years of ice age glaciers and primitive hardship. We survived those times by forming tight-knight groups and telling o
... show moreHe didn't win by being consistent. Hypocrisy is WHY people voted for him. They thought he was the only one who would "do the hard things" by being cruel to the people who are hurting everyone. That's the narrative at least, and while you can literally write libraries on the flaws, inconsistencies and logical discrepancies in Trump and the Republican narratives, the fact remains that most people are vulnerable to storylines.
Not moral flaws. Not character. Not record or experience. The only thing people largely, as a group, care about is JUST how someone makes them feel in that moment. And a lot of poorly educated, mentally unwell people saw and heard Trump lying to the people they believe were the cause of all our woes, and that's why they voted for him.
If we ever want another democracy that works, we have to understand that our population is genetically and physically identical to the beings who were clubbing each other's heads in during ten thousand years of ice age glaciers and primitive hardship. We survived those times by forming tight-knight groups and telling ourselves stories for how to survive. We're doing the same things right now, but someone else is guiding those stories. Either we stop the storytellers or we make better stories that people will want to repeat. Those are our only options.
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
NoneOfUrBusiness
in reply to ameancow • • •We do have better stories: the stories or class conflict and workers solidarity. It's just that the people in power would rather fascists win than let those stories reach the people that need to hear them.
ameancow
in reply to NoneOfUrBusiness • • •If the stories aren't working, they're not better.
"Better" here is going to be a highly loaded word, and revolves a lot around what results you're seeking. Humans connect with stories that connect with their feelings, it's how they got exploited to get us here. Decades of people signing away their own rights in service of stories that momentarily scared them, and here we are in the culmination of all these tiny stories and resulting policies that have been made to steer people to this place and time.
You can't just tell people now "Trump is the bad guy, trans people aren't threatening us, we have to help Ukraine, the wealthy elite are our real enemies."
It doesn't matter if the story is true, that story doesn't move people. It's just lecturing to the toddler-mind that makes up the bulk of our population. You can't make the people better. We HAVE to abandon this idea that everyone wants to "do the right thing" on some level. No we fucking don't. People want to feel validated. Not even feel good, that's less important to people than feeling heard and vali
... show moreIf the stories aren't working, they're not better.
"Better" here is going to be a highly loaded word, and revolves a lot around what results you're seeking. Humans connect with stories that connect with their feelings, it's how they got exploited to get us here. Decades of people signing away their own rights in service of stories that momentarily scared them, and here we are in the culmination of all these tiny stories and resulting policies that have been made to steer people to this place and time.
You can't just tell people now "Trump is the bad guy, trans people aren't threatening us, we have to help Ukraine, the wealthy elite are our real enemies."
It doesn't matter if the story is true, that story doesn't move people. It's just lecturing to the toddler-mind that makes up the bulk of our population. You can't make the people better. We HAVE to abandon this idea that everyone wants to "do the right thing" on some level. No we fucking don't. People want to feel validated. Not even feel good, that's less important to people than feeling heard and validated. Our stories need to make individuals feel something, individuals who view everything outside of their immediate sphere of awareness as abstractions and theory, not reality. You can't make these people feel sympathy or care for others, so we have to make them feel something else.
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
TimewornTraveler
in reply to ameancow • • •ameancow
in reply to TimewornTraveler • • •I was pretty clear that the effectiveness of a narrative is dependant on the results you're seeking. I think you can turn a narrative loose into the world and it will run autonomously to a degree, and you could use a story's ability to thrive and survive as a measure of at least how attractive and engaging it is, but no, I don't think that is what makes a story effective for the purposes of influencing a large amount of people to make better choices, to have more curiosity, to think more about things they don't normally think about.
Social engineering like this does take deliberate work. It takes effort and work to keep a story alive and growing. The problem is we already have tons of people doing this work for their own agendas. Sometimes they're good stories, sometimes they're terrible stories, but it almost doesn't matter the "quality" of the narrative, since our brains are designed to hook into narratives to explain the world even if the explanation doesn't even make a lick of sense. See: anti-vax doctors and flat earthers.
Rimu
in reply to ameancow • • •ShotDonkey
in reply to ameancow • • •I cannot upvote this comment as much as I would want to upvote it.
Can you give examples of what you think might be working stories?
ameancow
in reply to ShotDonkey • • •It's really hard to create a narrative with the sheer power and influence of stories using fear and hate, because we all respond much stronger to fear and anger than we do more abstract ideas like charity and empathy as a matter of survival. I genuinely have no idea how you fight this. It's literally an exploitation of all of our survival responses and it will always work on some segment of any given population, and once it starts to work on a few people, the effect will snowball. My prescription here is that we can't let hate speech start in the first place. We have held the sanctity of bad ideas in too much regard for too long, other nations don't fuck around with this shit because they know how contagious hate and fear is.
There is however one great example of successful, working populism I can think of though, and that's Bernie Sanders. He's been effective in messaging to both right and left for decades because he's consistent, he validates our problems and keeps his fo
... show moreIt's really hard to create a narrative with the sheer power and influence of stories using fear and hate, because we all respond much stronger to fear and anger than we do more abstract ideas like charity and empathy as a matter of survival. I genuinely have no idea how you fight this. It's literally an exploitation of all of our survival responses and it will always work on some segment of any given population, and once it starts to work on a few people, the effect will snowball. My prescription here is that we can't let hate speech start in the first place. We have held the sanctity of bad ideas in too much regard for too long, other nations don't fuck around with this shit because they know how contagious hate and fear is.
There is however one great example of successful, working populism I can think of though, and that's Bernie Sanders. He's been effective in messaging to both right and left for decades because he's consistent, he validates our problems and keeps his focus laser-tight and narrow on one talking point: which is how the wealthy oligarchs are hoarding our wealth. That's all, and he's held the same talking point for decades and it works on both sides of the political spectrum. It's just a shame that we're in a place where power has already been ceded to the corporate interests and people like Bernie are muzzled long before they get real power.
ShotDonkey
in reply to ameancow • • •Spaniard
in reply to fossilesque • • •I am not American, I was in the border of anarchism before all this but now I am full anarchist.
Thanks Orange man.
like this
DarkenLM likes this.
fossilesque
in reply to Spaniard • • •Majorllama
in reply to fossilesque • • •MochiGoesMeow
in reply to fossilesque • • •Jhex
in reply to fossilesque • • •Hey Muricans, this is what you wanted and voted for (or could't be bother voting to prevent)... enjoy
or, hit the streets and remove the fascist gov you elected
Lux (it/they)
in reply to Jhex • • •TurboWafflz
in reply to Lux (it/they) • • •frank
in reply to TurboWafflz • • •blind3rdeye
in reply to frank • • •Previously I thought almost all of them were, but then I found out that someone I've known for years hold that view. Any mention that maybe voting for the democrats would be a good idea results in an angry speech about genocide; which somehow (I'm not sure how) even has them lean towards Trump.
I appreciate the staunch opposition to genocide. But its kind of weird to see someone take a single issue so strongly to heart that their reasoning ends up inverted such that the candidate they favour is worse even on their one issue.
frank
in reply to blind3rdeye • • •Robust Mirror
in reply to frank • • •frank
in reply to Robust Mirror • • •That's very true. Bots once/twice removed? Like bots influencing the people posting here?
I can't imagine you get to that conclusion alone
irreticent
in reply to frank • • •That reminds me, I wonder what @Linkerbaan@lemmy.world is up to these days.
Paging @linkerbaan@lemmy.ml.
frank
in reply to irreticent • • •8000 comments in 9 months, dead silent shortly after the election. (World, .ml is more active now)
Jesus.
Linkerbaan
in reply to frank • • •@irreticent@lemmy.zip
The Lemmy.World mods permabanned and removed my account after I made a detailled posed exposing them for being massive Zionists in one of my posts on yepowetrippingbastards which got removed by db0. (A powetripping bastard. Ironic).
I am a lot less active since the trifecta of libs (db0, .world and blahaj) instantly ban my accounts. As soon as this was created I made a post about the Lemmy.world mods going on a Zionist power trip and removing my account and db0's response was to ban this account as well and censor the whole ordeal.
MisanthropiCynic
in reply to TurboWafflz • • •Brave Little Hitachi Wand
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to Brave Little Hitachi Wand • • •Brave Little Hitachi Wand
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MonkeMischief
in reply to Brave Little Hitachi Wand • • •I love the quote by Victor Saltzpyre in Vermintide 2:
"Do not be tempted to compare evils, lest you be tempted to cleave with the least of them!"
Brave Little Hitachi Wand
in reply to MonkeMischief • • •MellowYellow13
in reply to TurboWafflz • • •bent_on_mycelial_growth
in reply to MellowYellow13 • • •MellowYellow13
in reply to bent_on_mycelial_growth • • •bent_on_mycelial_growth
in reply to MellowYellow13 • • •MellowYellow13
in reply to bent_on_mycelial_growth • • •bent_on_mycelial_growth
in reply to MellowYellow13 • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to MellowYellow13 • • •Pandasdontfly
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to Pandasdontfly • • •Pandasdontfly
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to Pandasdontfly • • •Barack “I’ve got a pen, and I’ve got a phone.” Obama shows the same attitude from the other side.
It’s more palatable, but it’s still the same oppressive bullshit
Pandasdontfly
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to Pandasdontfly • • •Gaza is not a problem to me. I honestly don’t give a shit.
I don’t want anything except to be left alone, and neither party seems to be capable of doing that
Robust Mirror
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •blind3rdeye
in reply to MellowYellow13 • • •peppers_ghost
in reply to blind3rdeye • • •AoxoMoxoA
in reply to MellowYellow13 • • •I agree.
Labor party, Democrat, republican/ conservative, maga, etc. . And cut it out with this D/R bullshit. It's maddening. There are people that have a serious moral issue casting a vote for some of the choices given.
I'm sure a lot of the people who sat it out are more informed and upset with what is going on than some of those that "chose the lesser evil". They have every right to be furious.
NSRXN
in reply to TurboWafflz • • •Brave Little Hitachi Wand
in reply to Lux (it/they) • • •WhatThaFudge
in reply to Lux (it/they) • • •Lux (it/they)
in reply to WhatThaFudge • • •JokeDeity
in reply to Jhex • • •WarlockoftheWoods
in reply to Jhex • • •Jhex
in reply to WarlockoftheWoods • • •WarlockoftheWoods
in reply to Jhex • • •BlameTheAntifa
in reply to fossilesque • • •“…illegal protest…”?
Oh right, the US Constitution doesn’t exist any more.
like this
Quantumantics likes this.
YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH
in reply to BlameTheAntifa • • •like this
felixthecat likes this.
seejur
in reply to BlameTheAntifa • • •like this
DarkenLM likes this.
MisanthropiCynic
in reply to seejur • • •The problem is it cuts both ways. The Democrats saying they want hate speech to not be protected and Nazi propaganda to be censored is just the flipside of the same coin.
Either you have free speech or you don’t
CileTheSane
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •Lots of countries have free speech with limits on it. It's not uncommon and doesn't mean Citizens don't have freedom of speech.
For example:
m.youtube.com/watch?v=gmiKenqL…
like this
felixthecat likes this.
MisanthropiCynic
in reply to CileTheSane • • •If it has a limit, it’s not free
If I can’t do a Nazi salute, then I can’t say “I want to shoot Donald Trump in the face”
CileTheSane
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •"Free bread sticks"
"I'll take 100"
"Um... No. You can't have that many."
"iF tHeRe'S a LiMiT iT's NoT fReE!"
MisanthropiCynic
in reply to CileTheSane • • •Don’t be pedantic. A limit would be “free breadsticks only if you decide to pray to our god in front of us.”
If you say unlimited and then put a limit on it, that is illegal, as Verizon and AT&T found out in court
CileTheSane
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •When did the American Constitution promise "Unlimited Speech"?
MisanthropiCynic
in reply to CileTheSane • • •CileTheSane
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •It was both. They were advertised as free, they are free, but there are limits despite them being free
Nothing free is unlimited.
Alternatively Americans have no freedoms at all because they all have limits.
Freedom of Travel? You can't walk through a military base.
Freedom of Religion? No one is going to recognize your Jedi holy day. (Not to mention the government not recognizing the religious right to an abortion from Jews or TST.)
Freedom of commerce? You're not allowed to purchase heroin or import things from Cuba.
prole
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •Bruh... your pedantry started this
ReasonableHat
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to ReasonableHat • • •No, because it is unconstitutional to put someone under oath
By definition, it means a solemn promise that is beholden to a deity therefore it is illegitimate in court and law by the First Amendment.
You probably also think it should not be legal to kill people that break into your house to steal your TV.
ReasonableHat
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •SLVRDRGN
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to SLVRDRGN • • •ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •So you are saying there is a limitation
So there no free speech afterall 🤔
MisanthropiCynic
in reply to ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed • • •No. Even that limitation is unconstitutional. Look up the actual convictions and appeal rates for them
The most recent one is just a couple of months old where a guy threatened Kevin McCarthy, the House speaker, over 100 times on the phone and he only got probation because the judge knew the prison sentence wouldn’t withstand appeal.
ComicalMayhem
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •logical paradox in decision-making theory
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)MisanthropiCynic
in reply to ComicalMayhem • • •Society and laws are at the mercy of those who are in control. Right now in the US it is the Trump administration, but I remember Barack Obama saying, “I’ve got a pen, and I’ve got a phone,” emphasizing his ability to take executive action without waiting for Congress to push his agenda forward.
That’s not freedom.
100_kg_90_de_belin
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •prole
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •The Hegemon Husk
in reply to CileTheSane • • •Tarquinn2049
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to Tarquinn2049 • • •Advocating for hurting people is not a crime. Even an inactionable threat is not a crime. Look up precedent for arrests of inciting a riot and see how many of those charges actually stuck or help up on appeal.
The fact that people are saying yore okay to punch Nazis in the face would be a violation of what you are advocating for but you have no problem with that because you don’t like Nazis.
Tarquinn2049
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •I personally don't support people saying that either. Punching people in the face is not a great way to change their minds that they are being "the bad guy". And I think seeing alot of people post that, is counter productive to the goal of getting along and solving problems together reasonably.
But I don't, and shouldn't, control what everyone else thinks is a good idea.
grue
in reply to Tarquinn2049 • • •It's really not, though. Making a specific, credible threat against someone can be, but speaking in general terms that someone ought to be hurt without specifying how, when, or by who is not.
I'm sure you'll become correct momentarily, though, once Trump declares that calling for his removal (or hell, any criticism of the regime because why not?) would "hurt" him politically and is therefore a felony. That is what you had in mind, right?
BakerBagel
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to BakerBagel • • •There is no difference between those two phrases if you actually have free speech
And in fact, saying “I voted for Donald Trump”, is way more offensive to me than saying “kill everyone in Gaza”
the_hex
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •God you are a fucking cunt.
Just exercising my free speech. Don't mind me.
Natanox
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •Every freedom ends where freedoms of others are infringed. That includes every freedom, let it be freedom of movement (you can go wherever, but not someone else's house), freedom of expression (you can express yourself however, unless that expression instills hatred towards others, inflicts trauma on kids etc. etc.) and yes, also freedom of speech (You can say anything, unless what you do is calling for violence, attacks someone etc.).
Some of you US guys really don't understand how freedom in a society works.
notsoshaihulud
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •oh look, a literal “free speech absolutist.”
Wrong platform
MisanthropiCynic
in reply to notsoshaihulud • • •notsoshaihulud
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to notsoshaihulud • • •Is it so hard to believe you think Free speech should be absolute weapon should be unrestricted, abortion should be unrestricted, people should be able to harness electricity from solar and harness rainwater from the sky?
Because these are all things that are restricted here except for speech, so I am sure as fuck not going to budge on it
notsoshaihulud
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •prinzmegahertz
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to prinzmegahertz • • •prinzmegahertz
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to prinzmegahertz • • •Lemminary
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to Lemminary • • •Yes, it is.
That’s why all the Westborough Baptist people can stand around with God hates fags signs and nothing happens to them
Lemminary
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to Lemminary • • •Lemminary
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •MisanthropiCynic
in reply to Lemminary • • •I thought you were replying to me at first, but it just reaffirm what I said so now it looks like you were replying to someone else maybe
The ruling reaffirmed that the government cannot punish speech just because it is offensive or upsetting, reinforcing strong protections for free speech under the First Amendment.
Lemminary
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •Nope, I was definitely replying to you. The court decided there's a subtle difference and that their "God hates fags" signs skirt hate speech laws quite well within the US legal framework. And I unfortunately agree as a gay atheist.
Hold on. The fact that they went to trial over it and that there was litigation of the particular use of language is indication that not all speech is free speech and that careful consideration of where that line is was required. If their signs had been different this ruling would've also been quite different based on the same premise.
ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •One Question:
Do you think the government should ban CSAM (Child Sexual Abuse Materials)?
If yes, then you are already okay with limits the First Amendment and your argument is invalid
If no, you're a pedophile and you need to GTFO
MisanthropiCynic
in reply to ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed • • •TimewornTraveler
in reply to MisanthropiCynic • • •treadful
in reply to BlameTheAntifa • • •farngis_mcgiles
in reply to BlameTheAntifa • • •TheRedSpade
in reply to BlameTheAntifa • • •Ziglin (they/them)
in reply to BlameTheAntifa • • •I mean just to be fair isn't it illegal to have a huge protest without informing the authorities first? Also violent protests would be illegal too, right?
These assumptions are based on similar laws from other countries. But I don't really believe Trump is talking about those protests or just planning to forbid them from getting permission to happen.
That Annoying Vegan
in reply to BlameTheAntifa • • •thisfro
in reply to fossilesque • • •ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ
in reply to fossilesque • • •LOL
...i mean you gotta give the orange one credit for making a show every day.
Lasherz
in reply to fossilesque • • •Yerbouti
in reply to Lasherz • • •Sergio
in reply to Lasherz • • •All of them. Of course they'll frame it like "to enable our storied institution to continue performing our vital work, we are temporarily putting a moratorium on non-pre-approved meetings. Thank you for your understanding."
elrik
in reply to fossilesque • • •Well that's easy. The protests aren't illegal. Therefore this amounts to nothing.
Fuck this dude.
DarkFuture
in reply to fossilesque • • •x00z
in reply to DarkFuture • • •it goes, it goes, it goes, it goes, it goes...
GUILLOTINE
LordCrom
in reply to fossilesque • • •AlbertSpangler
in reply to LordCrom • • •samus12345
in reply to LordCrom • • •FartsWithAnAccent
in reply to fossilesque • • •"Guess I will just get sick and fucking die."
-Everyone with an autoimmune disease
MellowYellow13
in reply to fossilesque • • •stebo
in reply to MellowYellow13 • • •that would be the fifth time today, give them a break
deadbeef79000
in reply to fossilesque • • •Jesus wept.
If only y'all had some sort of constitution with some sort of amendment that ment you had free speech and another that said you had weapons with which to defend said constitution.
BenLeMan
in reply to deadbeef79000 • • •deadbeef79000
in reply to BenLeMan • • •Then they're also the enemy.
They're deliberately corrupting the meaning of your constitution to weaken the people.
collapse_already
in reply to fossilesque • • •nieminen
in reply to collapse_already • • •That word doesn't mean anything to him, except as a tool to prosecute people he doesn't like. Obviously laws and illegality don't mean shit when it's him breaking the law.
Pretty sure there is enough evidence for treason at this point, but Congress won't act on it.
AeonFelis
in reply to nieminen • • •"Illegal" as in "illegal immigrants". It's a connotation word, it doesn't mean anything on its own obviously.
ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed
in reply to nieminen • • •*persecute
nieminen
in reply to ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed • • •HumbleFlamingo
in reply to collapse_already • • •Madison420
in reply to collapse_already • • •lazyViking
in reply to Madison420 • • •Bytemeister
in reply to Madison420 • • •Benaaasaaas
in reply to collapse_already • • •lazyViking
in reply to collapse_already • • •lazyViking
in reply to lazyViking • • •Zerush
in reply to fossilesque • • •werefreeatlast
in reply to Zerush • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
IndiBrony
in reply to Zerush • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
MystikIncarnate
in reply to IndiBrony • • •prole
in reply to MystikIncarnate • • •samus12345
in reply to Zerush • • •Maggoty
in reply to fossilesque • • •Is the President trying to tell private institutions who they can do business with?
Why I never!
like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
Adori
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
Cocopanda
in reply to fossilesque • • •endeavor
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
NSRXN
in reply to endeavor • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
MonkeMischief
in reply to NSRXN • • •booly
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
Blackmist
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
shirro
in reply to Blackmist • • •They won't. They couldn't even get upset over kids being massacred every week in their schools. They are a broken people. Have been for decades. Their military.and economy didn't fail. Their moral fiber did. They substituted thoughts and prayers and other virtue signalling for community organisation and direct action.
If you think I am wrong then don't reply. Go outside and prove it. Nobody gives a shit what people write in social media. It means nothing.
dream_weasel
in reply to shirro • • •Lots of us are mad and just don't know what to do. One at a time we get arrested or shot. It takes a group effort but nothing has crystallized yet.
I got two kids under 4, I'm not lining up to get my ticket punched just to get the ball rolling.
shirro
in reply to dream_weasel • • •Exactly. In Ukraine parents fight and die so their 4 year old will have a country to return to. In the US they let their souls die instead and leave their kids to fight their own battles.
You are a nation of Uvalde cops.
Downvote me. Argue. In your hearts you all know it is true. You are broken. You were clearly broken since at least the 90s when you met Columbine with platitudes instead of tens of millions of mothers on the streets screaming in pain.
dream_weasel
in reply to shirro • • •I'm not going to downvote you. Suggest an action.
Edit: And inspire us by what you are doing besides flaming on the Internet. I'm sure you must be doing something, rather than standing by passing the buck? Right?
shirro
in reply to dream_weasel • • •Thankfully I live in a rich liberal democracy where over 90% vote and we still have a fairly decent though far from perfect society.
I can be outraged by what Americans let happen to their country because I'm human and a parent but I can't help and shouldn't help. American society needs to find its own solutions, in its own time and on terms it can live with.
You can't pass this off onto me.
dream_weasel
in reply to shirro • • •shirro
in reply to dream_weasel • • •Sorry, but I think you and those like you are deflecting. I still see posts from Americans saying this wasn't us. We are nice people. We have no power. It is crazy. Why are you even online telling us this? You think we blame you personally?
I live in the other side of the planet. If I am going to help anyone its going to be some poor unfortunate struggling with poverty, war and genocide imposed on them.
Not delusional people from the richest country on earth who had everything and lack the will to influence their own fate.
dream_weasel
in reply to shirro • • •You don't have to apologize it sucks for us as much or more than it sucks for you.
It's easy to gripe on the Internet for anybody and it's much harder to act. In a country like the US, where do you even start? It is huge, the military has more money than god, and the police force is by and large the little brother of the military but with way less oversight and more dysfunction. You want to stop a city once? Sure, np big deal. You want to bring this country to heel? That takes coordination.
It's really easy to talk if you are in western Europe where your country is the size of one middle of the road US state and you've got 8 months of vacation a year. Same if your country has like 8 cities total because basically 3/4 of your nation/continent is uninhabitable. You do not share the same problems of scale. Period. At all. I could go out tomorrow and get killed for no reason, but what purpose does that serve?
I'm glad you have a good view from your high horse. Consider doing something more than watch, because you know what? You could be next. I'm here asking for tips
... show moreYou don't have to apologize it sucks for us as much or more than it sucks for you.
It's easy to gripe on the Internet for anybody and it's much harder to act. In a country like the US, where do you even start? It is huge, the military has more money than god, and the police force is by and large the little brother of the military but with way less oversight and more dysfunction. You want to stop a city once? Sure, np big deal. You want to bring this country to heel? That takes coordination.
It's really easy to talk if you are in western Europe where your country is the size of one middle of the road US state and you've got 8 months of vacation a year. Same if your country has like 8 cities total because basically 3/4 of your nation/continent is uninhabitable. You do not share the same problems of scale. Period. At all. I could go out tomorrow and get killed for no reason, but what purpose does that serve?
I'm glad you have a good view from your high horse. Consider doing something more than watch, because you know what? You could be next. I'm here asking for tips and tricks and you're in AUS looking down your nose while you suck your own dick. Real cool man.
in4apenny
in reply to dream_weasel • • •shirro
in reply to in4apenny • • •dream_weasel
in reply to shirro • • •Hey let's go broski. Are you right or aren't you? Are you giving up because all of AUS is like #3 to all US states by population? It's so easy: whatever works for AUS you only have to work for 13 TIMES the population in the US and then you win. Look how fuckin easy it is! Where are you? Your parents house? Surely they have Internet too.
Edit: or MAYBE you can be humble, STFU and try to help? Otherwise you can keep being a pretentious knob, and nobody will know it but us. By balance of probability your only like 13 anyway. Today I'm not feeling so charitable to dickbags.
SinAdjetivos
in reply to shirro • • •The_Sasswagon
in reply to shirro • • •Gimme a break, I don't expect you to know everything that goes on here, just as all I "know" about Australia is "you" made Murdoch, continue to abuse native people just like us, and dingos regularly eat babies. Like asserting that no Australian people care about those issues is wrong and obviously my fundamental understanding of the country is flawed, it's also wrongheaded to assert the American people are all broken and spineless for years and have bad moral fiber (I'll assume this is a normal saying for y'all elsewhere, but that sounds like a nationalistic dog whistle to my ears).
It is especially bizarre to claim that Americans are incapable of direct action a few years after the country had some pretty explosive sustained protests against police violence and racism. The US is filled with broken people, yes, but not because of some nebulous moral failing, and it's the broken government you have an issue with, not the poor fools who were born here.
Looking to the mentioned protests a few years back might explain the lack of similar reaction now. They burned
... show moreGimme a break, I don't expect you to know everything that goes on here, just as all I "know" about Australia is "you" made Murdoch, continue to abuse native people just like us, and dingos regularly eat babies. Like asserting that no Australian people care about those issues is wrong and obviously my fundamental understanding of the country is flawed, it's also wrongheaded to assert the American people are all broken and spineless for years and have bad moral fiber (I'll assume this is a normal saying for y'all elsewhere, but that sounds like a nationalistic dog whistle to my ears).
It is especially bizarre to claim that Americans are incapable of direct action a few years after the country had some pretty explosive sustained protests against police violence and racism. The US is filled with broken people, yes, but not because of some nebulous moral failing, and it's the broken government you have an issue with, not the poor fools who were born here.
Looking to the mentioned protests a few years back might explain the lack of similar reaction now. They burned youth prisons, occupied police stations, ran for office, took to the streets, were shot at, gassed, and went to jail. For what? Nothing changed endured, the establishment "left" abandoned the movement and helped undo any change that occured, the government clamped down harder on dissent, and Trump got reelected. Maybe the methods of resistance have to change to succeed, you cant keep fighting the war of yesterday and expect to win after all, and you sure don't have to publicize your actions for online strangers to check your moral fiber.
Posting may be meaningless, but I'd say all this to your face if we were talking in person too. Communication is how we change and change minds, and leaving nonsense unchallenged is how we got into this mess in the first place, and I won't make that mistake here or in my non digital life.
shirro
in reply to The_Sasswagon • • •I am not the enemy and I am genuinely sorry for your hardship (though not nearly as much as for people born into poverty, war and genocide in far lass fortunate countries)
Americans trying to justify themselves on social media seems like a waste of energy and focus and its probably not good for mental health. Outside opinion that contradicts the narratives we have in our heads is important. My opinion might be wrong but its a genuine observation. My very real fear is we can't rely on US citizens to fight for their democracy anymore and that has global implications for the world and my children's future. Please prove me wrong. I love to learn new things. The BLM protests were huge but perhaps they turned from grass roots outrage into a social media phenomenon instead of a real effective political movement.
Protecting our kids is an issue that cuts across all beliefs, races, classes to the heart of our humanity, the most basic goodness that unites our species. I think the turning point, if such a thing exists, may have been Columbine, 1999. Not the bad guys on 9/11, not
... show moreI am not the enemy and I am genuinely sorry for your hardship (though not nearly as much as for people born into poverty, war and genocide in far lass fortunate countries)
Americans trying to justify themselves on social media seems like a waste of energy and focus and its probably not good for mental health. Outside opinion that contradicts the narratives we have in our heads is important. My opinion might be wrong but its a genuine observation. My very real fear is we can't rely on US citizens to fight for their democracy anymore and that has global implications for the world and my children's future. Please prove me wrong. I love to learn new things. The BLM protests were huge but perhaps they turned from grass roots outrage into a social media phenomenon instead of a real effective political movement.
Protecting our kids is an issue that cuts across all beliefs, races, classes to the heart of our humanity, the most basic goodness that unites our species. I think the turning point, if such a thing exists, may have been Columbine, 1999. Not the bad guys on 9/11, not Putin election interference or MAGA. That is the issue that would have really outraged most countries. Millions on the streets protesting. Politicians of all parties scrambling to act. The shootings kept getting worse every year and it was swept under the carpet. More than the homelessness, wealth inequality, healthcare, that makes me worry a lot for your future and by extension the rest of us. We are definitely drifting to the right here and are a worse society as a result but for all our similarities and weaknesses that is still the the most fundamental issue that separates your politics and society from ours which is why I think we can never really be in your situation (we also don't have the historical acrimony and economic disadvantage stemming from a bloody civil war).
MystikIncarnate
in reply to Blackmist • • •potoo22
in reply to MystikIncarnate • • •MystikIncarnate
in reply to potoo22 • • •But where will they deport you to?
Ehhh? Checkmate ICE.
potoo22
in reply to MystikIncarnate • • •MystikIncarnate
in reply to potoo22 • • •Oh right.
Sorry.
CileTheSane
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
tatann
in reply to CileTheSane • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
CileTheSane
in reply to tatann • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed
in reply to CileTheSane • • •شاهد على إبادة
in reply to fossilesque • • •I remember when the Democrats brought down the hammer hard on anti-genocide protestors in universities. Trump is doing the same, but expanding it to all protests.
May 10, 2024 Map: Where university protesters have been arrested across the United States
like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
SaffronDovovan
in reply to شاهد على إبادة • • •شاهد على إبادة
in reply to SaffronDovovan • • •Ledericas
in reply to شاهد على إبادة • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to Ledericas • • •lazyViking
in reply to SaffronDovovan • • •HappySkullsplitter
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
SLVRDRGN
in reply to HappySkullsplitter • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
infinitesunrise
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
leaky_shower_thought
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
rustydrd
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
samus12345
in reply to rustydrd • • •ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed
in reply to rustydrd • • •Apparantly, (in the US) any protest that needs to occupy the road requires a permit. Yea imagine how stupid it is, you want to protest the government and you need to apply for permission?!? I was shocked when my teacher told me about this. Seems like a huge First Amendment violation to me, but society just goes along with it. 😓
So unless your protest is strictly on the sidewalk, you need a permit. So fucking dumb.
Rivalarrival
in reply to ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed • • •257m
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •Rivalarrival
in reply to 257m • • •SatansMaggotyCumFart
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •Rivalarrival
in reply to SatansMaggotyCumFart • • •Excellent.
Might I suggest that instead of targeting fellow victims for undue harassment, you direct your attention toward the actual perpetrators and their supporters? For environmental causes, might I suggest some sort of shop where an oil-based product like gasoline or diesel fuel is sold? Perhaps an entity that sells or services the vehicles that consume those fuels.
Perhaps you could publish a manifesto telling the public and these businesses alike what businesses need to do in order to avoid Molotov-flavored "civil disobedience". Things like "a majority of the cars on a dealer's lot must be EVs" and "EVs should be priced lower than comparable ICE vehicles". Or "fuel stations should have at least as many charging stations as fuel pumps".
When you publish your manifesto, make sure it gets sent to insurance companies, preferably the companies insuring the businesses responsible for the environmental catastrophe we are facing.
We have enough laws against public use of the street. There is no need to demonstrate for more.
SatansMaggotyCumFart
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •Rivalarrival
in reply to SatansMaggotyCumFart • • •SatansMaggotyCumFart
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •Rivalarrival
in reply to SatansMaggotyCumFart • • •cheers_queers
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •that's literally why blocking roads in protest is so effective. enough angry calls to the mayor office due to people being late for work etc, is how protesting puts pressure on representatives to actually represent the people.
or did you think that huddling on sidewalks holding signs was supposed to do something?
Rivalarrival
in reply to cheers_queers • • •Blocking roads in protest has proven effective at exactly one thing: Increasing the enforcement and penalties for jaywalking.
It is counterproductive at everything else.
Where did I say huddle on sidewalks?
I think JSO should be firebombing ICE car dealerships, gas stations, muffler shops, and other entities and agents of the oil industry. Not harassing victims of that industry.
ABCDE
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •Well... no.
Rivalarrival
in reply to ABCDE • • •ABCDE
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •Rivalarrival
in reply to ABCDE • • •No doubt, no doubt. There are plenty of articles claiming JSO protests are effective.
Of course, if they were actually effective, you wouldn't need to point to news articles promoting the virtues of standing around in the street. You'd be able to point to oil consumption rates. If their protests were actually effective, oil consumption rates would be falling.
The reality is that those articles do nothing but make you feel good, like something is being done. But reality doesn't care about feelings, or the fiddling articles designed to make us feel good while the world burns.
ABCDE
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •If that is the only metric you are looking it, kind of. It slumped during COVID and has looked like it's tailing off somewhat. Without tax breaks, subsidies and support for other forms of transport, say, we will not shake our dependence.
But, we can look at specific countries and see if those things have helped on a national scale, like Norway, for example, which has seen consumption decline since 2018. And Sweden. And Japan. And Germany. And...
Rivalarrival
in reply to ABCDE • • •They started obstructing traffic in 2022, not 2018. Norway's consumption has increased, significantly, since they began obstructing traffic.
Japan's decline since then is commensurate with its population decline. Germany's and Sweden's are flat. UK is up even more than Norway.
ABCDE
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •I am telling you when their trend started. Norway's consumption has not increased, it is down on 2018, as I said. It had a slight decline in 2023 (the increase between 2020 and 2022 is when people stopped driving during COVID then came back to restart its downward trend).
Actually no, if you know what commensurate means. The population has dropped around 4% since 2008, yet oil consumption has been decreasing since 1996.
Germany is similar in terms of consumption, Sweden likewise.
ourworldindata.org/grapher/oil…
Rivalarrival
in reply to ABCDE • • •en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_g…
JSO didn't exist in 1996 or 2008 or 2018 or 2020. It was founded in 2022.
You're giving JSO traffic obstructions credit for declines that happened decades before they came into existence, and in countries where they havent actually disrupted traffic.
You're giving them credit for "declines" that have actually been increases since the time they started regularly obstructing traffic in 2022.
Obstructing traffic is not an effective means of protest. Target actual agents and entities associated with the oil industry, not the victims.
rhetorical technique using mere volume and rapidity of arguments
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)ABCDE
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •Sigh... and how would you like to quantify that when there are so many factors?
They are effective and bring about awareness among other things.
Rivalarrival
in reply to ABCDE • • •I would like to spend less time talking to environmentalists about useless people harassing victims of the oil industry, and more time actually targeting the oil industry.
For that, you don't need to identify massive, centralized oil infrastructure. You need to look at the oil industry's agents and operations within your own community. There is no shortage of businesses associated with the supplies and maintenance of ICE vehicles. Every one of those businesses needs to feel direct pressure to focus on EVs, other transportation alternatives, or go out of business.
Gas/petrol stations and car dealerships, for example. Set a standard for them to follow; target them for an appropriate degree of hostility when they don't.
- For gas stations, they can install at least as many EV charging stations as they have fuel pumps.
- For dealerships, they must offer more EVs than ICE vehicles, and the sticker price of those EVs must be equal to or lower than comparable ICE vehicles.
... show moreI would like to spend less time talking to environmentalists about useless people harassing victims of the oil industry, and more time actually targeting the oil industry.
For that, you don't need to identify massive, centralized oil infrastructure. You need to look at the oil industry's agents and operations within your own community. There is no shortage of businesses associated with the supplies and maintenance of ICE vehicles. Every one of those businesses needs to feel direct pressure to focus on EVs, other transportation alternatives, or go out of business.
Gas/petrol stations and car dealerships, for example. Set a standard for them to follow; target them for an appropriate degree of hostility when they don't.
Businesses that meet these standards are supporting the "transportation" industry. Businesses that fail to meet these standards are supporting the "oil" industry.
JSO's website makes it clear that "arrests" are an important part of their demonstrations. There are plenty of arrest-worthy actions they can take at a gas station. They can create plenty of "awareness" at an ICE car dealership, and they can do it without convincing the general public to support cops and right-wing politicians.
257m
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •Rivalarrival
in reply to 257m • • •zipzoopaboop
in reply to ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed • • •glitch1985
in reply to zipzoopaboop • • •pappabosley
in reply to ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed • • •Zink
in reply to pappabosley • • •I think it’s probably like more roads = more permits needed to protest.
I’m in the US and all too familiar with how car centric our infrastructure is. On top of the permit thing, our angry rushed populace will demonize you for protesting anything if you’re blocking the road to do it. You could be giving CPR to a toddler and within minutes some emotional support truck would be running you over or rolling coal in your face.
e$tGyr#J2pqM8v
in reply to ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed • • •Source: aclu.org/know-your-rights/prot…
Protesters’ Rights
American Civil Liberties Unionfibojoly
in reply to ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed • • •ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed
in reply to fibojoly • • •ch00f
in reply to ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed • • •Restriction site - Wikipedia
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Texas_Hangover
in reply to ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed • • •TheEighthDoctor
in reply to ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed • • •kn0wmad1c
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
potoo22
in reply to kn0wmad1c • • •arthurpizza
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
MystikIncarnate
in reply to arthurpizza • • •Sam_Bass
in reply to fossilesque • • •MonkeMischief
in reply to Sam_Bass • • •Juice
in reply to fossilesque • • •Lemminary
in reply to Juice • • •Juice
in reply to Lemminary • • •spujb
in reply to fossilesque • • •YarHarSuperstar
in reply to spujb • • •samus12345
in reply to fossilesque • • •mavu
in reply to fossilesque • • •fossilesque
in reply to mavu • • •m532
in reply to fossilesque • • •No masks, and saying the quiet part out loud?
One could say he is "mask off"
Mee
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Fitik likes this.
badbytes
in reply to fossilesque • • •Hellsfire29
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Fitik likes this.
honurash
in reply to Hellsfire29 • • •🇨🇦 holdstrong
in reply to Hellsfire29 • • •houstoneulers
in reply to fossilesque • • •What's an illegal protest? I thought first amendment speech covered that
Also, how can he expel a student from a school he doesn't control? or does he mean expel students from the country?
BigDanishGuy
in reply to houstoneulers • • •If the school receives any federal funds, he is somewhat in control
meliaesc
in reply to BigDanishGuy • • •RedAggroBest
in reply to meliaesc • • •Jarix
in reply to houstoneulers • • •houstoneulers
in reply to Jarix • • •wolframhydroxide
in reply to houstoneulers • • •Jarix
in reply to houstoneulers • • •Christ, you had to ask. We really do live in interesting time.
My apologies, its not real that i know of. But god damn it seems like the next step doesnt it?
Cheers mate
conditional_soup
in reply to houstoneulers • • •theangryseal
in reply to conditional_soup • • •Madison420
in reply to conditional_soup • • •Yep. Nationwide nonviolent sit in protests? Pass laws to make it legal to run them down on a car if you feel threatened.
Violent storming of the seat of our nations power and symbolic political heart? Oh that's just some guys being dudes.
Agent641
in reply to conditional_soup • • •AtomicHotSauce
in reply to houstoneulers • • •Gaboose
in reply to houstoneulers • • •technocrit
in reply to Gaboose • • •The schools don't give a shit about free speech either.
Trump and the schools just want to attack anti-genocide protestors.
Third student expelled from Columbia's Barnard College for pro-Palestinian activism
MEE staff (Middle East Eye)TheBeege
in reply to houstoneulers • • •Since many answers aren't actually answering the question...
My comment is largely wrong!! See the reply below
~~Most places require a permit to assemble en masse. There are "free speech zones" where you can create large gatherings without any kind of advance notice or permit or whatever. Most universities have a free speech zone towards the middle of their campuses. Cities will also often have at least one but somewhere that doesn't inconvenience commerce, like a park or near city hall.~~
~~Most mass assembly requires a permit and sometimes a fee, even in public places. Following this prevents arrest by "disturbing the peace" or other such laws, usually.~~
~~How this squares with the first amendment is interpretation. Individual freedom of speech is protected except very specific public order and safety things, e.g. calling for violence. Coordinated, mass freedom of speech is perceived as a fast path to rioting.~~
~~I'm not saying this is right, but this is my understanding of how things work. I'm not a lawyer or an expert in these matters. This is j
... show moreSince many answers aren't actually answering the question...
My comment is largely wrong!! See the reply below
~~Most places require a permit to assemble en masse. There are "free speech zones" where you can create large gatherings without any kind of advance notice or permit or whatever. Most universities have a free speech zone towards the middle of their campuses. Cities will also often have at least one but somewhere that doesn't inconvenience commerce, like a park or near city hall.~~
~~Most mass assembly requires a permit and sometimes a fee, even in public places. Following this prevents arrest by "disturbing the peace" or other such laws, usually.~~
~~How this squares with the first amendment is interpretation. Individual freedom of speech is protected except very specific public order and safety things, e.g. calling for violence. Coordinated, mass freedom of speech is perceived as a fast path to rioting.~~
~~I'm not saying this is right, but this is my understanding of how things work. I'm not a lawyer or an expert in these matters. This is just what I learned from activist friends in my university time ages ago.~~
As for expulsion, public universities are run by states. To my understand, Trump has no legal mechanism to do this. He's just talking out of his ass or expects to bully public institutions into expelling students by threatening to withhold department of education funding... but he's planning to kill that anyway, so 🤷♂️
nBodyProblem
in reply to TheBeege • • •I spent most of my 20s doing grassroots campaigning, with a large part of it being protest planning and organization. You generally do not need a permit to conduct protests on public property, even large ones, in the USA.
The exceptions are very specific; i.e. blocking roads may require a permit.
aclu.org/know-your-rights/prot…
Protesters’ Rights
American Civil Liberties UnionTheBeege
in reply to nBodyProblem • • •meyotch
in reply to houstoneulers • • •Yes. Also no.
It means all things and nothing at the same time.
technocrit
in reply to houstoneulers • • •Opposing genocide.
Oh you precious child.
The schools don't need Trump to expel their own students.
Third student expelled from Columbia's Barnard College for pro-Palestinian activism
MEE staff (Middle East Eye)Thunder03
in reply to fossilesque • • •werefreeatlast
in reply to fossilesque • • •conditional_soup
in reply to fossilesque • • •DTguess
in reply to fossilesque • • •Agent641
in reply to DTguess • • •xorollo
in reply to Agent641 • • •mvirts
in reply to fossilesque • • •billwashere
in reply to fossilesque • • •I didn’t think it was possible to hate this fucker more and more each day and yet here we are.
Aconite
in reply to fossilesque • • •onecarmel
in reply to fossilesque • • •Kalysta
in reply to fossilesque • • •MIDItheKID
in reply to Kalysta • • •I'm not sure if you've realized, but that means nothing. It has become abundantly clear that the law (and lawsuits) are used by the ruling class and not against them. When used against them, it doesn't matter. They either ignore the fines, pay the pennies, tie it up in court, or in some other way get off scot free.
I'm all for protesting, but make no mistake, people will be made an example of, and it won't be the oppressors.
prole
in reply to Kalysta • • •AbsoluteChicagoDog
in reply to fossilesque • • •TimewornTraveler
in reply to AbsoluteChicagoDog • • •Sauerkraut
in reply to TimewornTraveler • • •Worx
in reply to Sauerkraut • • •ShrimpCurler
in reply to Worx • • •bitwolf
in reply to Worx • • •glitch1985
in reply to TimewornTraveler • • •NoForwardslashS
in reply to glitch1985 • • •Echo Dot
in reply to glitch1985 • • •glitch1985
in reply to Echo Dot • • •HappySkullsplitter
in reply to fossilesque • • •SolidShake
in reply to fossilesque • • •figjam
in reply to SolidShake • • •apostrofail
in reply to SolidShake • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to SolidShake • • •technocrit
in reply to SolidShake • • •SolidShake
in reply to technocrit • • •m532
in reply to SolidShake • • •Noxy
in reply to fossilesque • • •That's the only part here anyone needs to know.
He'll threaten to pull funding for his stupid pet issues first, then pull it anyways for everyone else.
Therefore, fucking ignore his threats, nothing you can do will ever appease him and he will go back on his own word like it's a bodily function.
Ledericas
in reply to fossilesque • • •Hobbes_Dent
in reply to fossilesque • • •The country that did the Million Man March would rather cuck for this guy now.
Yes daddy. Ok daddy. You’re so manly we love you.
Not_mikey
in reply to Hobbes_Dent • • •There was a poll a few days before the famous march on Washington that culminated in King's "I have a dream speech" and two thirds of Americans thought the march was unamerican.
America has always hated uppity protesters demanding rights.
Bubbaonthebeach
in reply to fossilesque • • •the_q
in reply to Bubbaonthebeach • • •MedicsOfAnarchy
in reply to the_q • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to MedicsOfAnarchy • • •ᴍᴜᴛɪʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴᴡᴀᴠᴇ
in reply to MedicsOfAnarchy • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to the_q • • •the_q
in reply to Guns0rWeD13 • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to the_q • • •the_q
in reply to Guns0rWeD13 • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to the_q • • •the_q
in reply to Guns0rWeD13 • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to the_q • • •100_kg_90_de_belin
in reply to Bubbaonthebeach • • •If the people with more guns think that the State is free there is no need to actually use them
Echo Dot
in reply to 100_kg_90_de_belin • • •Yeah but they are losing out because of all of this as well. A crashing economy will screw everyone over regardless of how they vote. It's not like any of his plans have policies in them to protect his supporters, he doesn't care about his own supporters.
In 4 years time he'll either no longer be able to remain president and will step down due to term limits, or he will have completely taken control and he'll be in charge indefinitely as an actual dictator. Either way he doesn't need his supporters anymore.
100_kg_90_de_belin
in reply to Echo Dot • • •Snowclone
in reply to Bubbaonthebeach • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to Bubbaonthebeach • • •PokerChips
in reply to Guns0rWeD13 • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to PokerChips • • •KE arms
Guerrilla Tactical
KAK Industries
but if you think voting with your dollar is going to have enough impact to deter you from getting WHATEVER YOU CAN, then you don't understand how a war works. don't be a liability. don't be stupid. the time for protesting and boycotting is OVER.
helloworld55
in reply to fossilesque • • •This is absolutely absurd. People have a right to a lawful assembly.
Anyone supporting this guy is insane. Literally trying to become an emperor
Bamboodpanda
in reply to helloworld55 • • •He doesn't have to try. The Supreme Court made him one last year.
Isn't that fun!? /s
PlasmaSnake
in reply to helloworld55 • • •Lemmist
in reply to PlasmaSnake • • •MuskyMelon
in reply to Lemmist • • •Echo Dot
in reply to MuskyMelon • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to helloworld55 • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to Guns0rWeD13 • • •boonhet
in reply to fossilesque • • •bitwolf
in reply to fossilesque • • •Scolding7300
in reply to bitwolf • • •That Annoying Vegan
in reply to Scolding7300 • • •technocrit
in reply to bitwolf • • •Zip2
in reply to fossilesque • • •mrmanager
in reply to Zip2 • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to mrmanager • • •lepinkainen
in reply to Zip2 • • •Theory is that it’s on the list.
They change the name of they country and the claim the constitution doesn’t apply.
Christer Enfors
in reply to Zip2 • • •Canonical_Warlock
in reply to Zip2 • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to Zip2 • • •technocrit
in reply to Zip2 • • •"Land stolen by slavers."
Actually factual, not just some phony religion.
bean
in reply to fossilesque • • •Echo Dot
in reply to bean • • •ZeroOne
in reply to fossilesque • • •Echo Dot
in reply to ZeroOne • • •ZeroOne
in reply to Echo Dot • • •sasquatch7704
in reply to fossilesque • • •Two minutes later: we don't have enough skilled people to make Teslas and computer chips.
Four minutes later: I have an idea, let's hire immigrants.
Six minutes later: we hate immigrants, they are stealing our jobs.
CheeseNoodle
in reply to sasquatch7704 • • •sasquatch7704
in reply to CheeseNoodle • • •I'm sure that will work well in a country with more guns then people. And I'm sure we will not see more Mario brothers and cousins doing something unexpected.
/s
piccolo
in reply to sasquatch7704 • • •sasquatch7704
in reply to piccolo • • •My point was that it can get bad really fast and I'm sure that there are already people who practice shooting oranges and maybe thinking of shooting a bigger orange.
*I'm not saying this to encourage gun violence. Just that probably someone already thought to do a Mario brother on the big orange.
Fontasia
in reply to fossilesque • • •John
in reply to Fontasia • • •Echo Dot
in reply to John • • •Taleya
in reply to John • • •Prehensile_cloaca
in reply to Fontasia • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to Fontasia • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to Guns0rWeD13 • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to Fontasia • • •technocrit
in reply to UltraGiGaGigantic • • •Yes.
‘No surprise’: US students slam Biden’s comments on Gaza encampments
Jillian Kestler-D'Amours (Al Jazeera)bestboyfriendintheworld
in reply to fossilesque • • •IndustryStandard
in reply to bestboyfriendintheworld • • •DrainedOctagon
in reply to IndustryStandard • • •Tja
in reply to DrainedOctagon • • •DrainedOctagon
in reply to Tja • • •What alternative did Bernie Sanders support? The same fucking guys that beat up American students protesting. And we saw how ready the Democrats were towards criticism when Kamala said "I'm speaking".
The supposed "far more ready to crticize bullshit" LMAO. In practise, regardless of what each claims, Democrats and Republicans are two wings of the same party.
Tja
in reply to DrainedOctagon • • •DrainedOctagon
in reply to Tja • • •Tja
in reply to DrainedOctagon • • •MadhuGururajan
in reply to DrainedOctagon • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to MadhuGururajan • • •DrainedOctagon
in reply to MadhuGururajan • • •I honestly wish I could agree with you.
DrainedOctagon
2025-03-06 15:29:45
Cataphract
in reply to bestboyfriendintheworld • • •You do yourself and any potential ally a disservice when you spout negative bullshit like this. And it is bullshit because what you're saying is nonsensical and fucking being upvoted (come on lemmy, we're better than this).
What do pro-Palestinian student protesters at US universities want?
What is the effective message of protesting at a university over Trump? People have been organizing protests, but what part are you demanding the students actually protest? Just... protest Trump in general? at the University? Protesting till he's taken out of office or some action is performed?
I honestly want to see the rest of the government make a choice of bowing or standing up to the would-be king befo
... show moreYou do yourself and any potential ally a disservice when you spout negative bullshit like this. And it is bullshit because what you're saying is nonsensical and fucking being upvoted (come on lemmy, we're better than this).
What do pro-Palestinian student protesters at US universities want?
What is the effective message of protesting at a university over Trump? People have been organizing protests, but what part are you demanding the students actually protest? Just... protest Trump in general? at the University? Protesting till he's taken out of office or some action is performed?
I honestly want to see the rest of the government make a choice of bowing or standing up to the would-be king before we call to send in the children. Let us know where everyone in the system stands because once Uni kids get involved with mass protesting.... it's gonna get dicey real fast.
I really hope the unwarranted attacks that everyone is spewing at each other is statistically on the decline, it really needs to be shot down the instant it's seen so we don't have actual trolls and bots getting footholds.
What do pro-Palestinian student protesters at US universities want?
By Sam Cabral & Ana Faguy (BBC News)technocrit
in reply to bestboyfriendintheworld • • •American students should protest for as long as it takes to end a genocide.
The current fascist is a direct result of previous fascists. Genocide normalizes fascism.
This liberal support for genocide and fascism is a major part of the problem.
Eugene V. Debs' Ghost
in reply to bestboyfriendintheworld • • •mEEGal
in reply to fossilesque • • •Americans, come to Europe !
you'll be treated like human beings here
Zerush
in reply to mEEGal • • •Bobbettes
in reply to Zerush • • •Zerush
in reply to Bobbettes • • •Echo Dot
in reply to mEEGal • • •TonyOstrich
in reply to mEEGal • • •technocrit
in reply to mEEGal • • •You're talking about white people, right?
djsoren19
in reply to mEEGal • • •Yeah, you guys have a great, long history of being super chill about immigrants. Maybe our marginalized trans members of society can go hang out in the Romani or Syrian camps and hear about how wonderful European hospitality can be. Oh wait, most of them won't be able to, because they don't have an in-demand technical degree and European countries have strict immigration requirements.
What's happening in America is starting to happen in Europe too. We also thought we were pretty nice, before the mask came off.
NigelFrobisher
in reply to mEEGal • • •FauxLiving
in reply to fossilesque • • •Yeah, okay. With a pandemic on?
You gotta at least wear a surgical mask in public for your health, in minecraft.
Your doctor could probably write you a recommendation, prior to the protest, in case you have any legal issues.
Meeech
in reply to FauxLiving • • •insufferableninja
in reply to FauxLiving • • •ᴍᴜᴛɪʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴᴡᴀᴠᴇ
in reply to insufferableninja • • •Zerush
in reply to fossilesque • • •Meeech
in reply to Zerush • • •They would say "look he has an American flag. I see nothing but a peaceful protest by true patriots"..
I hate myself for typing that given the context of that vile picture.
acargitz
in reply to fossilesque • • •Tja
in reply to acargitz • • •Samsy
in reply to acargitz • • •VinnyDaCat
in reply to fossilesque • • •I used to be the pride of my family for having finished college. Now it's demonized by them.
I feel for the students of today. College was an important time for me. I experienced a lot of new ideas, my mind was opened. I didn't get to do much in grad school, but my first four years of college changed me and I wouldn't be the same without those experiences. The way the situation is escalating we may see colleges completely locked down or even abolished.
Guns0rWeD13
in reply to VinnyDaCat • • •CancerMancer
in reply to Guns0rWeD13 • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to CancerMancer • • •ThermonuclearCactus
in reply to Guns0rWeD13 • • •Ah yes, Lemmy.world
AKA "I can't believe it's not Reddit!"
ABCDE
in reply to Guns0rWeD13 • • •Phoenixz
in reply to VinnyDaCat • • •This, in part,is also the educated vs. the uneducated.
Most of Trump's policiet are obviously dumb when given a single thought, but you have to be able to make that throught. The vast majority of magas are not capable of making a first, let alone second, thought
PersnickityPenguin
in reply to VinnyDaCat • • •Zink
in reply to fossilesque • • •“Thank you for your attention to this matter.”
Every time I scroll past this image, that’s the line that gets me. Bold threatening declaration by fascist dictator, then ends like a work email reminding you not to leave food in the cafeteria fridge over the weekend.
Echo Dot
in reply to Zink • • •GoofSchmoofer
in reply to fossilesque • • •"You know the best strategy to counter this is to do nothing, it will burn itself out after awhile. If a few people die or get imprisoned well that's okay as long as I don't have to do anything difficult or will affect my portfolio and control. "
obviously I made this quote up but it is how I feel about the people in power that say they are against this administration but really are doing jack shit to support or engage the population. Sure there are some that are doing somethings and I appreciate that, but fuck man do most of the "opposition" party really not have a spine? Like what the fuck, there are millions of citizens that are genuinely scared for their life and freedom and all we are getting is crickets...
Echo Dot
in reply to GoofSchmoofer • • •That's because left-wing politicians are still politicians. They want to remain politicians they don't want to end up getting arrested or lose their jobs, so they are only going to push back against this to the limit of which they think they can get away with, which basically means making statements, but otherwise not really doing anything.
If you want action you'll have to do it yourself. Unfortunately this does present a bit of a problem because you are then playing into the narrative that the Right have, that everyone who opposes them is a criminal. Because by definition you'll have to commit crimes in order to oppose them, since they will make opposing them a crime. Welcome to the wonderful circular logic of extremists.
okamiueru
in reply to fossilesque • • •nectar45
in reply to fossilesque • • •nectar45
in reply to nectar45 • • •Maggoty
in reply to nectar45 • • •ᴍᴜᴛɪʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴᴡᴀᴠᴇ
in reply to Maggoty • • •Maggoty
in reply to ᴍᴜᴛɪʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴᴡᴀᴠᴇ • • •Guns0rWeD13
in reply to fossilesque • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to Guns0rWeD13 • • •Isn't the democrats plan in this situation to call the cops? To use the worlds best justice system? Just call the cops. You know, the ones that murder people/dogs for fun, beat their spouse, make up charges to fuck your life up, and assault protestors?
Just call the cops. I'm sure the wealthy democrats in their gated communities are right on this one. They didn't carefully craft a bipartisan police state alongside the republicans for nothing. They know better then us dirty working class folk
Just call the cops.
/$
Guns0rWeD13
in reply to UltraGiGaGigantic • • •Clot
in reply to fossilesque • • •ChiefGyk3D
in reply to fossilesque • • •easily3667
in reply to ChiefGyk3D • • •Bakkoda
in reply to ChiefGyk3D • • •teamevil
in reply to ChiefGyk3D • • •Fidel_Cashflow
in reply to fossilesque • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to fossilesque • • •technocrit
in reply to UltraGiGaGigantic • • •Fizz
in reply to fossilesque • • •MortUS
in reply to fossilesque • • •(List of Mentioned Trump Cuts)
fossilesque
in reply to MortUS • • •ComradeRachel
in reply to MortUS • • •MortUS
in reply to ComradeRachel • • •exploitedamerican
in reply to MortUS • • •Phoenixz
in reply to fossilesque • • •Phoenixz
in reply to fossilesque • • •Illegal protests.
Okay so since protests are an expression of opinion, and you got that pesky first amendment, all protests are legal, so this tweet is a nothing burger.
Crikeste
in reply to Phoenixz • • •That or free speech is dead. Those amendments aren’t laws of nature, they need to be maintained.
So we’ll see.
OsrsNeedsF2P
in reply to Phoenixz • • •There's a lot of nuance about how you do it. You can't protest in the middle of a highway, for instance.
aclu.org/know-your-rights/prot…
Protesters’ Rights
American Civil Liberties Unionendeavor
in reply to Phoenixz • • •polle
in reply to endeavor • • •Phoenixz
in reply to polle • • •60d
in reply to Phoenixz • • •Jumpingspiderman
in reply to Phoenixz • • •ajikeshi
in reply to Phoenixz • • •i am pretty sure every school and university will get a staff of attorneys, lawyers and judges to determine if the protest might be illegal
since there is no way a teacher can make that "decision"
technocrit
in reply to fossilesque • • •Yes, fuck this. And fuck the previous guy and every president before that.
Biden’s Very Trumpian Response to the Peaceful Student Protests
The New RepublicOsrsNeedsF2P
in reply to technocrit • • •Jumpingspiderman
in reply to OsrsNeedsF2P • • •crowbar
in reply to fossilesque • • •CafecitoHippo
in reply to crowbar • • •ᴍᴜᴛɪʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴᴡᴀᴠᴇ
in reply to CafecitoHippo • • •Scary le Poo
in reply to ᴍᴜᴛɪʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴᴡᴀᴠᴇ • • •ᴍᴜᴛɪʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴᴡᴀᴠᴇ
in reply to Scary le Poo • • •Theonetheycall1845
in reply to ᴍᴜᴛɪʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴᴡᴀᴠᴇ • • •Goodmorningsunshine
in reply to crowbar • • •Jumpingspiderman
in reply to crowbar • • •interdimensionalmeme
in reply to crowbar • • •mjsaber
in reply to crowbar • • •Jumpingspiderman
in reply to fossilesque • • •About
Congressman Al GreenGranbo's Holy Hotrod
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Someplaceunknown likes this.
Redfugee
in reply to Granbo's Holy Hotrod • • •like this
Someplaceunknown likes this.
Granbo's Holy Hotrod
in reply to Redfugee • • •like this
Someplaceunknown likes this.
Goldholz
in reply to Granbo's Holy Hotrod • • •Exactly.
This disgusting muslem black socialist commie coming here telling us what to do and to think and forcing his DEI Woke idiologie onto us!!! /s
shastaxc
in reply to Granbo's Holy Hotrod • • •PersnickityPenguin
in reply to Granbo's Holy Hotrod • • •Granbo's Holy Hotrod
in reply to PersnickityPenguin • • •surph_ninja
in reply to fossilesque • • •Rhoeri
in reply to surph_ninja • • •Yeah. It had nothing at all to do with the ninety fucking million people that didn’t vote. I wonder how many of those were the smug entitled stay at home single issue assholes there were whining And yelling at everyone here all the way to November.
.
surph_ninja
in reply to Rhoeri • • •Rhoeri
in reply to surph_ninja • • •News flash bud: Everyone is in opposition to genocide.
Regardless of whatever bullshit accusation you hurl at people. Refusing to vote because you manufactured enough outrage to believe your own bullshit is absolutely defined as single-issue voting. You know this shit was going to happen- and you knew it was going to be exponentially worse under Trump- but you stood aside anyway.
Take your bow.
And what? I get that you’re fishing for reasons to report people for as that is what you do, but anyone can see that there is nothing at all even close to resembling “holocaust denial” about anything I said, so you can go ahead and put that little straw man away- it’s not going to work on me.
surph_ninja
in reply to Rhoeri • • •Rhoeri
in reply to surph_ninja • • •Oh they do. But it’s apparently far too complicated for you to understand and sadly, I lost my patience to explain it to you people back in November.
Be wrong.
surph_ninja
in reply to Rhoeri • • •Rhoeri
in reply to surph_ninja • • •…. Says the person that is somehow able to rationalize that doing nothing at all can bring the change you demand from others.
Because as we all know: History is RIFE with examples of people not doing jack-shit while reaping the benefits of their inaction.
Richie Rich
in reply to fossilesque • • •MithranArkanere
in reply to Richie Rich • • •The American politicians basically barred the ability for any other party to get into power, until people gave up going to vote, and fascism won by a third of the votes.
It all started before the Red Scare. The moment the Robber Barons got their plans thwarted, they started planning so it would never happen again, and they played the long, long game.
Rivalarrival
Unknown parent • • •You would have a point if "protesting" was "life". But it's not.
When demonstrators were pissed off at Elon Musk, they didn't picket grocery stores and kindergartens. they didnt blockade old folks homes, delay firefighters and ambulances.
They burned Tesla dealerships.
JSO could learn a thing or two from these anti-Musk demonstrators.
GiddyGap
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Someplaceunknown likes this.
Spectre
in reply to GiddyGap • • •NightShot
in reply to fossilesque • • •like this
Someplaceunknown likes this.
JaggedRobotPubes
in reply to fossilesque • • •interdimensionalmeme
in reply to JaggedRobotPubes • • •The tree of liberty extremely needs to be watered with its natural manure. Get off your lazy ass americunts, stop the fucking cancer or I will destroy space for 500 years.
pyre
in reply to fossilesque • • •~~1st~~
~~4th~~
~~5th~~
~~6th~~
~~8th~~
~~14th~~
werefreeatlast
in reply to fossilesque • • •thermal_shock
in reply to werefreeatlast • • •werefreeatlast
in reply to thermal_shock • • •But_my_mom_says_im_cool
in reply to fossilesque • • •JuxtaposedJaguar
in reply to fossilesque • • •A_Chilean_Cyborg
in reply to fossilesque • • •DragonTypeWyvern
in reply to A_Chilean_Cyborg • • •snowst0mper
in reply to fossilesque • • •yet_another_commie
in reply to snowst0mper • • •Andromxda 🇺🇦🇵🇸🇹🇼
in reply to snowst0mper • • •meme_historian
in reply to fossilesque • • •MithranArkanere
in reply to fossilesque • • •Defenestration is already taken by Russia, but Trump is not that original, so I'm guessing he'll use the same method, considering he's working form Putin and all.
oyzmo
in reply to fossilesque • • •bennypr0fane
in reply to fossilesque • • •