You must log in or register to comment.
The media is owned by the first group
Removed by mod
Do things typically go well for people who use firearms against police? Is this some sort of crazy shit that I’m too Canadian to understand?
Red Flag there
Very definitely not if you’re black. Two famous cases of police murder- Breonna Taylor and Philando Castile involved legal gun ownership and use. The former involved her boyfriend shooting at police because he thought they were home invaders. They didn’t care.
Removed by mod
Please talk to a therapist. Your mindset is not normal or healthy.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Quick question before I actually respond: are you white?
Dude things are already south for you based on the shit you’re saying
deleted by creator
The Democrats and the Republicans are both on the side of Capital, the Republicans just want fascism as well. The left is the side that is demonized by the media just as much as the fascists.
Removed by mod
Why can’t we just sit here and argue… like decent goddamn human beings?!
This you?
I think you’re all fucking stupid
Removed by mod
It isn’t blatant spin, it’s you got called out for arguing against your own positions. If you are genuine you’d do some introspection.
Everyone calling you stupid and telling you to shove your stupidity up your ass is not censorship. You aren’t being suppressed, you are being evaluated, and if that makes you feel like you should shut up, then the free market of ideas is working.
Removed by mod
And they completely have that right, seeing as they own the website? Where did this come from? What are you on?
Removed by mod
that’s all fine
It never is, sry for the “reddit” hivemind, corners of the Internet are different as you know, 🤷♂️.
And lemmy.world censored lemmygrad.ml and hexbear and others by defederating with them, as well as enterprises and the government.That’s not censorship. Both lemmygrad and hexbear are alive and well and freely available to anyone interested in what they have to say. By your definition I’m “censoring” Fox News by not watching it.
Removed by mod
That’s more of a centrist take. It makes perfect sense for trans allies to demonize transphobes, for example. Nobody is advocating against constructive conversation, but sometimes views are genuinely rooted in malice and thus cannot be reasoned with.
Removed by mod
I’m not sure you want to take a middle ground between being transphobic and being a trans ally, as that’s just transphobia. The transphobes should, in fact, be shunned and demonized for being bigots.
Homophobia ain’t cool either.
Removed by mod
But you’re the one who brought in assigned labels to begin with?
That’s why we can’t “just sit here and argue”, because you’d eventually end up arguing against yourself. Thanks for cutting out the rest of the loop the “but my free speech” people would normally need to be guided through before the conclusion was reached.
Removed by mod
Weirdly, most people I hear about being “censored” are able to tell everyone in the world how censored they are.
You ever read one of those heartwarming stories about a woman who paid somebody’s medical debt?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Do you have like a humiliation kink or something
who is served by those feel good dystopia stories?
Removed by mod
I want universal healthcare, basic income, and the right to carry a gun for the next time police come to wreck my life over a false accusation made by a violent asshole!
The only things Republicans care about in this list is guns. Perhaps you can give us some examples of policy proposals the GOP has made in the last few years that don’t involve removing rights from people and consolidate presidential power?
Removed by mod
I’m simply asking for proposals by the GOP that look to solve issues, not remove rights, or consolidate power. It really shouldn’t be hard if they exist. But then again, we are talking about the same group that put out in 2020 that their party platform was just “Whatever Trump wants.”
Removed by mod
Lol! Sometimes these days I think I’m in, The Truman Show. I mean I have to be, right?.. This can’t be what the culmination of human evolution has created. It’s all too implausible to be true.
Even the independent or non-profit media sources that have a lot of credibility and seem generally pretty chill will fall back on this every now and again.
You see it anytime you hear people talking about division or hyper partisanship “on the rise” in that clinical, abstract way that sounds objective. It’s always in a discussion about the current state of “discourse”, and it’s nearly always remarked on like the story is the spike in “disagreements”, and not about what the disagreements are actually about.This pervasive idea that somehow people being upset about the current state of affairs and the rise of actual fascism is some kind of aberration.
Like “Gee, people sure are arguing a lot these days. Boy howdy, they’re sure a feisty bunch, aren’t they?” Women literally had their right to an abortion taken away from them, we had armed fascists storming our God damn capital on the word of a President and current candidate, we had thousands die to a preventable illness because of rampant misinformation and right wing individualist propaganda, and still you hear this tone that people being really angry right now is weird.
Fucking Kurkusagst, a channel I have a lot of respect for, just the other day dropped a video blaming social media on the mounting political and social divisions in our country, and implying all will be well if we just stopped using big media platforms. Social media is definitely part of it, but anyone seriously acting like it’s the primary reason people are fucking pissed right now has to be some well-off straight white man, because the rest of us have some pretty damn good reasons to be pissed. I don’t need Twitter or Reddit or Facebook to make me angry, I just need to be paying the fuck attention.
It’s insulting to every women, every LGBT person, every non-white person, and every single person struggling to make a living right now to imply “social media is just getting us riled up.”
Can you share that video/channel? I couldn’t find Kurkusagst in any searches
https://youtube.com/@kurzgesagt?si=w3MTquS3_Dsj9lVY
Kurzgesagt - I heavily support what they do and have purchased from their shop multiple times. I have not watched the new video however.
Oh I love these videos! I actually was already half through the social media one already and had lost it in my history. Thanks for reconnecting me 🙂
I mean if you’re still supporting Republicans you’re kind of the problem.
deleted by creator
So do you just wake up as a curmudgeonly dingus, or does it take a few hours of the day for you to get like that?
Hi bot.
God, how I wish that your comment actually bothered me. Instead, I’m just entertained by your username having enough letters for the term “dingus”
What chides me the most is the underlying origin of the Republican Party, the very much needed fiscal conservatism, is now missing. It’s been traded for saboteurs rigging things to fail so they can gut chunks of government.
Was “fiscal conservatism” the origin of the Republican party?
From wiki:
The new Republican Party envisioned modernizing the United States, emphasizing expanded banking, more railroads and factories, and giving free western land to farmers (“free soil”) as opposed to letting slave owners buy up the best properties. It vigorously argued that free market labor was superior to slavery and was the very foundation of civic virtue and true republicanism; this was the “Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men” ideology.
Fiscal conservatism is just a GOP invented MacGuffin to give them cover when they employ their advisorial antigovernance strategy. Every time we put a conservative in charge they blow the deficit up and funnel money to their backers.
Then they cry fiscal conservatism when a DEM takes power and say we need to cut social programs. Fiscal conservatism is a lie people continue to believe in because they hate anyone getting a break that isn’t themselves. Themselves or wealthy white men who they project their own ambitions onto.
They also see wealth as a kind of virtue in and of itself, one that should be rewarded.
That is true.
From wiki:
From blog:
Cite your sources.
I don’t know, I wasnt going to do a deep dive because I already know the republican party is a reanimated corpse of the party it once was.
deleted by creator
Transcontinental high speed trains
I mean, I would love that, but unfortunately it will be easier and cheaper for the US to adopt electric airplanes than trying to build several tens of thousands of miles of high speed rail to create even 2 transcontinental lines.
Electric airplanes don’t exist, and making one long distance while still being fast isn’t feasible with current battery technology. Battery technology is rapidly advancing though.
And yet, China has already made enough high speed rail to go fully across the United States 10 times, East to West. (Which is predicted to increase to 16.5 US widths (43k miles), in 12 years!)
https://partsolutions.com/engineering-an-electric-jet-engine/
Electric jet turbines exist, this dude just followed the designs that MIT made. They just need investment, and aren’t cheaper than jet fuel.
Also China has laid a lot of rail on their east coast. You’ll notice that they aren’t laying high speed rail into the center or western portions of China, but then authoritarian countries can do infrastructure projects easier than democratic countries.
I actually watched that video when it came out. You misunderstand how it works, it actually burns butane gas and produces carbon dioxide. The reason he calls it electric is that it uses a fan instead of a turbine to speed up the air before the combustion.
The reason why we can’t make electric planes isn’t because we don’t have the engines, its because batteries are just too heavy to fit on something that needs such light weight and high energy.
And if you want to know the real reason why China can make so much rail, RM Transit on Youtube has some great videos on the topic, iirc it was mainly because other countries contract way too much out, work at very small scales, and stop and start construction often, preventing skill and momentum from building up. And in the U.S. general just bad management is another big factor.
The US has about the same chances of becoming a functional democracy at this point as building the first intergalactic super highway.
I always find it funny when the US is called “the centre of the free world” or the “defender of democracy” when they don’t even defend their own democracy. They need to make some massive changes:
- preferential voting (should slowly erode the two party system)
- taking executive power away from the president and giving it to Congress (i.e. having an executive government of ministers and a Prime Minister)
- having Congress appoint the president based on merit instead of popular vote (since the last point gives them ceremonial duty only)
- either ban or severely cap political advertising
- improve education standards for the poorest Americans
- abolish conscription
- misinformation laws (though a very difficult topic to cover)
- put Donald Trump in jail - he’s done the crime, make him do the time - in a real democracy the rich can’t just get away with serious crimes
- presidential pardons should be removed
Here’s my take on how the US could fix itself up,
-
House expanded to 1 seat per state for every 50k permanent residents of that state, arranged in districts of no less than 5 and no more than 9 representatives allocated along municipal and zip code divisions, then along shortest split line divisions where that results in especially population packed districts.
-
Senate expanded to 27 senators per state, 21 senators to every county level division with a larger population than any state, and 15 senators to every indigenous nation (even if they don’t have a reservation) and labor union of 5,000 or more members.
-
House elects the ministers of the executive, including the chief executive, as well as the next four “back-up” ministers who receive the same briefings as the minister themselves, Senate elects the president and shadow ministers to each department, again all who get the same info as the appointed minister.
-
The “president” has the power to call the Senate to a veto vote on legislation that’s passed the house, which has to pass by the nearest margin to the passing margin in the house rounded up.
-
The “president” also gets the power of pardon still BUT the house can by simple majority veto any individual person in any given group of pardons, and can also veto awards presented by the “president”
-
All elections take place every 4 years all at once, no primaries no divergent election years at state and municipal level no shorter term lengths, if it needs to be replaced more than every 4th year make it an appointed position, congressfolks are elected every 4th year, senators are elected every 12th to fit to the scheme.
-
All elections are multi-seat STAR
-
Drafts are banned unless in the case where the US is being directly invaded or legally considered to have been invaded via mutual defense treaty, and only if Congress and the Senate in a combined session vote to authorize it after 5% or more of available forces to the theater in question have been lost in a span of less than a month.
-
Constitutional amendments have to be proposed and approved by different bodies, if the House and Senate jointly propose, the States have to approve, if the States propose, a national referendum has to approve, and if a national referendum proposed a combined session of the House and Senate has to approve, if the body proposing does so by simple majority, it has to be approved by a 2/3rds majority, and if it’s proposed by a 2/3rds majority, it only has to pass by a simple majority to be approved.
-
Not misinformation laws, but false expert laws, presenting of information as if you are an authority on a subject without possessing a license from the government or a nationally accredited organization of the experts you are accused of pushing yourself off as having the authority of or superior authority to. Would go a long way in going after fake medicine at least, if the US press ever formed a licensing organization it’d also allow prosecution of fake news outlets without actually posing a threat to press freedoms since the press itself can protect anyone by just granting them a license
-
Adoption of IB education model nation wide, year round schooling, multi-teacher classrooms, and rotating classrooms, abolition of private education below the university level at least, and rotating teachers among all schools within commuting distance of them. Also, no funding schools with any local taxes, it all comes from the federal level, only thing that is allowed to change locally is the inclusion of indigenous language and culture classes specific to the local indigenous nations of the area.
-
Not just locking Trump up, but establishing a specific trial process that deals entirely with illegal acts carried out by public officials that’s rigidly built to be free of influence from anyone who could stand to benefit personally from the results of the trial going one way or the other. Also the same thing but for cops specifically and with undercover agents in the police.
I’ve got a whole bunch more of these
It’s going to be easier to just throw out the whole government and start again.
To a certain extent that is basically what I just proposed, the only thing kept over is the Haudenosaunee Confederation style of how a matter is decided on, arguably it actually conforms more since the second house being able to propose a matter is a significant deviation from how the Haudenosaunee do it, for them the roll of the second house is for the smaller member nations to be able to have their say after the two biggest nations have already come to agreement on the issue at hand, and to be able to send a matter back to them to reconsider so that the big guys can’t just gang up on the smaller nations.
Historia Civilis did a pretty sweet write up of it all and honestly the Senate being a conditional block as opposed to a generator of legislation on its own feels more like how a “bicameral” legislative system should actually be designed to work properly.
I like these ideas but the Senate electing the shadow government wouldn’t be very effective if the same party held power in the House and Senate. However, I do think that recognition of a Shadow Government is important, given that it has access to all the same information as the government.
They’re the official shadow cabinet so that the opposition parties don’t take credit for anything they aren’t doing just because they have a guy who they swear would be doing a better job.
-
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I think you’re thinking of “intercontinental” (between continents), rather than “transcontinental” (across a continent)
deleted by creator
Anyone can do that mistake.
Look on the brigside, if it was a conservarive, that person would think that the trans in transcontinental would mean something “woke”
That said, high-speed trains that crossed both continents would be amazing.
But our lord and savior Trump says he is going to close the border. Clearly that is the best way forward.
Not to get all John Lennon, but imagine there weren’t any borders to close…
The important thing is you corrected someone. You all right in my book. You good people. Salt of the earth as far as I’m god damned concerned! And I’m VERY concerned.
Sorry, we only have trans-exclusionary feminist trains. Next one boards at Platform 9-3/4.
“I hear those things are awfully loud”
Those…bastards.
Slavery never went away, read the 13th amendment.
deleted by creator
Sharecropping is not slavery in the same sense as it was in the early days of the US
Section 1
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Idk about you but that seems to make it pretty cut and dry that slavery is illegal in the US. Prison is different because when you are convicted, you are stripped of many rights. I don’t agree with it, but it is what it is.
deleted by creator
They stopped being humans when they decided to steal that bread to feed their children!!
/s
They stopped being humans when they decided to smoke that weed growing in the ditch or eat that wild growing mushroom.
/s
It’s forced labor, not actual chattel slavery in the sense that the state can’t actually buy and sell prisoners and is obligated to free them under certain conditions. Nor, unlike chattel slavery, can one be born into the status of prisoner.
deleted by creator
If there’s an exception to a rule then it’s not a cut and dry rule. If slavery is illegal except when it affects certain people then it’s not illegal overall.
affects certain people
What certain people? Criminals?
Because when you, for instance, kill someone, you can’t just simply walk free and do whatever it is that you want? That’s not an exception. Minorities in pre-1865 US (including Indians, this is coming from one himself) committed the crime of not being white with guns.
You have to pay penance of some kind, you really think the government is going to just take people’s money they use to feed and house your ass for free? I work in corrections mind you (fucking hate it but it’s either that or homelessness for my family) and I don’t think drug users should be imprisoned for usage, violent offenders and pedophiles though? Yes, put their asses to work.
That’s no more slavery than a child doing chores.
I was so ready to just downvote for implying criminals don’t deserve rights and move on, but something about your argument does give me thought and I kinda wanna explore this more, especially since you’re working in this field yourself. Apologies if this is kinda ranty, I’m processing my thoughts and why the comment stuck with me as I go.
When people are put in jail, it costs money, like you said, it’s not free, so what do taxpayers expect to get out of that money? Depending on the answer to that question, yeah, it seems fair to think of manual labor as a way to offset the cost (though I doubt the taxpayer is seeing the benefits of those offset costs). I’d like to think in an ideal world however, what is being paid for is rehabilitation; turning criminals back into contributing members of society, in which case, their future productivity would ideally offset the costs to society of jailing them. I think there are enough stories of violent offenders who go on to be lawyers and such to show this is possible and what society should strive for, though I know it’s not easy and may not be possible in all cases. In this case, forced, manual labor would probably be counterproductive, but arguments could be made for voluntary or even paid labor that contributes to rehabilitation.
Outside of rehabilitation, there’s also the simple idea that jails are just paid to keep these people off the streets, in which case the consideration of cost is just, how badly do you not want these people in society? Following that idea, forced labor kind of makes sense, they’re just in jail to be off the streets, might as well make them useful while they’re removed from society, but then the argument is how much labor is ok?
Then again, if the idea is strictly punitive, any amount of forced labor becomes justified since the idea is that they are in there to suffer and serve penance. In this case I suppose the only consideration is whether the amount of penance in the form of labor fits the crime.
I’m just thinking out loud here, I don’t really know anything about this topic for certain. My background though is in special education, and I know from my early studies that whenever it’s tested, a lot of inmates turn out to have some sort of diagnosable learning difficulty, so I feel that the existence of jails to a large extent is a failure of society to support vulnerable people. At the same time, I do recognize that there are people who we really don’t want to be part of society and whom rehabilitation might not be possible, but then if I let my thoughts go down that direction the logical conclusion seems to be the death penalty? And that’s not something I’m really for, especially since there are already so many cases of wrongful death penalties.
tl;dr, I guess we really have to know what we want as the goals for jails as a society, communicate that clearly, and from there we can talk costs and the potential usefulness of forced labor.
Inmates DO have rights, most of the rights that you have, inmates have. It is namely the 2nd amendment that is taken away from specifically felons.
I do not nor have I ever supported the death penalty whatsoever, and that’s aside from exactly how inefficient the process is (the process leading up to death that is). I support rehabilitation, but rehabilitation outside of prison is for people addicted to crack, math, opiods, severely addictive substances like that. The rehabilitation for a murderer IS prison.
Work is not the only form of penance, as work in penance is just community labor. The penance is also paid in reflection and reconciliation.
I think the right to vote is also taken away in a lot of cases, right? But the part about rights wasn’t the main point I was trying to discuss.
I feel like reflection, reconciliation, rehabilitation, all those are processes that need to be facilitated to be effective, and at least from the outside, it doesn’t seem like that’s really happening in prisons. I’m not sure how prison can act as rehabilitation for murder in and of itself. I mean, in general, we know murder is bad, but there’s a lot that can be behind an individuals decision to kill someone and I’m not sure how being in jail by itself deals with that. I’m sure we’ve all heard the examples of say, someone killing the person who they found out was abusing their child, and generally people seem more sympathetic there, but in the end, it is murder. And yes, this is a fringe situation but for the sake of fleshing out ideas, does this person deserve to be put in jail and into forced labor? I feel like most people would say no, which means that even in the case of murder, there’s still some level of nuance as to what level of punishment is accepted by society.
The right to vote is usually taken away but like firearms, it depends.
The hypothetical circumstance you explained doesn’t play out like you typically think, they don’t always go to prison
The one rule of public policy, if they can do it to anybody, they have all the precedent they need to do it to you too, even if they swear you’re safe, oftentimes especially if they swear you’re safe.
Every rule has an exception, the better the rule the fewer exceptions. The perfect rule only has 1 exception. It’s the rule of exceptions to the rules. At least the people who wrote that were aware that exceptions needed to be included. Only sith speak in absolutes, with the exception of the speaker.
What happens when you also create or enforce laws mainly against minorities?
That’s exactly what happened in the South.
Shhh. You’re giving away the punchline.
Constitution: slavery is legal under certain conditions.
You: “Idk about you but that seems to make it pretty cut and dry that slavery is illegal in the US”
You: “lol I’m gonna ignore everything past that part to try and prove my incorrect point”
Edit: and also ignore the point itself. If you have to meet VERY SPECIFIC CONDITIONS to make something legal, then it’s safe to say it is not actually legal or even technically
While I agree with you we must admit that this is not a democratic republic or a republic in any way if we acknowledge that the law allows the ability to restrict voting rights.
If it must be an absolute then even someone guilty of treason must still have a representative vote.
Which I would agree with, but that is neither here nor there about what currently is.
the media doesn’t think they’re equal, the media is elevating slavery because they’re owned by the people who will end up owning the slaves
Spoilers: We’re already slave-lite. Owned by our landlords, credit bureaus, state and federal government (taxes) and education finance system (immutable loans).
It’s nowhere near as bad as real slavery was. The goal is to make us earn as much as possible for those that own us though under the guise of “freedom”. Freedom is dictatorship. Freedom is being controlled. Freedom is doing the right thing as prescribed by those in power and their interpretation of law which always seems to side with those who already have the money and power.
“1984” by George Orwell.
Key tenets include:
-
Big Brother Is Watching You: This is the omnipresent government surveillance.
-
War Is Peace: This paradoxical slogan highlights the manipulation of truth.
-
Freedom Is Slavery: Suggests that individual freedom is an illusion.
-
Ignorance Is Strength: Encourages the populace to accept false narratives.
-
Thoughtcrime: The idea that thinking against the Party is criminal.
-
Doublethink: Holding two contradictory beliefs simultaneously.
-
Newspeak: Language designed to limit freedom of thought.
-
The Party’s absolute control over truth and reality.
Seems like a how to guide for the right imo.
-
The goal is to make us earn as much as possible for those that own us though under the guise of “freedom”. Freedom is dictatorship. Freedom is being controlled. Freedom is doing the right thing as prescribed by those in power and their interpretation of law which always seems to side with those who already have the money and power.
They keep sayin’ we’re free, but we’re all just loose.
According to the 13th amendment you’re already an actual slave state except the slaves are called prisoners.
As someone who is not from the US I have to say: this “meme” is very biased and one sided. Most of you do not even understand how one sided it is. You are taking your moderate opinion and comparing it with the most extreme opinion of the other side. If the other side did this they would say:
One side just wants that they stop killing babies
The other side wants to brainwash children into mutilating their own bodies.
Ok, except the US right literally has an out in the open plan for implementing a fascist dictatorship called project 2025. You can go read it yourself. This is not some small wing of the party. Basically every single Congressperson and senator is backing this.
The other side wants to brainwash children into mutilating their own bodies.
“And it’s our job to do that when we circumcise them!”
killing babies Most non-biased description of abortion ever.
/sThe OP is a bit exaggerated, you’re right, but it not too far from the truth: Trump, the president that started a coup, is running for president stating only he can fix the problems the US has which would include removing all the leftist vermin (extremely fascist). White supremacists and nazis don’t make up a majority of his support, but most if not all of them do support him (bringing back nazis and bringing back “slavery” in the form of giving power to white supremacists). Trump likes to use dog whistle showing his support for them, while also not rebuking those same groups of people. The crazy things the far left wants to do is… help trans kids using procedures backed by science and supported by most major countries(and to clarify, by procedures I mean non-permanent hormone treatment, rather than permanent surgeries). We’re basically talking about the right trying to prop up a treasonous authoritarian, who utilizes the help of Nazis, white supremacists and religious zealots who want to take away women’s rights vs the left that is trying to help kids.
Except the right is actively pushing to make women property, working with nazis and nazi sympathizers, undermining the education system, undermining social services, undermining workers rights, ect.
The (by comparison) left certainly doesn’t have clean hands, but they aren’t brainwashing or mutilating children.
And it’s not like the “just want to stop killing babies”. If that were the case they would be supporting social services and social safety nets for families. They would show SOME kind of care for the children AFTER they’re born too.
It isn’t biased, it’s just accurately describing reality.
Then all you have to do is point at scientific evidence showing no children is mutilating their body, nor “babies are being murdered”. Right wingers reject empirical evidence. Your example holds no water at all and completely misrepresent what even the left advocates for. And keep in mind that abortion is even popular on both sides of the aisle.
The challenge is, especially in the US, the moderate side of the right arguments don’t seem to be made anywhere. All the party is pushing are the extreme views so it does appear to be exactly this in the media (which is where the majority of people are influenced by regardless of it’s right or not).
If all they are pushing is the extreme views, perhaps it is because those have become their CORE views
I personally enjoy killing babies early in the morning and save their blood for the evening, i d hate that to stop
You’re missing their point
God I hope this is a feeble attempt at sarcasm. Otherwise you likely live in Uganda or Indonesia, in which case, my condolences.
Bad faith framing of the issue by utilizing a false equivalency based on half-truths.
Is it cuz you’re only attracted to the cis kids?
You’re comparing a bad faith manipulation of policy descriptions to objectively stated goals of both sides
Killing babies and brainwashing children are known shock and scare rhetorical isms within the US, in the US the Left wants to institute healthcare, and the Right wants to, in brief, repeal the 20th century and a decent chunk of the 19th too.
You may be right but for Republicans that usually doesn’t matter.
deleted by creator
This is literally the platform of right-populism. “Wasn’t it good in the 50s when a single income for a guy with an associates was enough to support a family in a life of comfort, and a summer job could pay for university? That’s why women shouldn’t be in the workforce and black people shouldn’t have rights.”
You forgot the part where they also give these people an easy target for the miseries in their lives.
“Do you hate your life? Do you wish you were living in a mansion, eating grapes lowered into your mouth by a servant, instead of working 50 hours a week? Well, have we got a deal for you! Just try Blaming A Minority, and all your problems will disappear! But wait, act now, and we’ll throw in a second minority, free! Just pay shipping and handling, and vote for our fascist candidate”
deleted by creator
Haha don’t forget moderates.
“We should listen to both sides, I mean nazis and fascists had good ideas too!”
I think it’s a mistake to call them moderates. The “moderates” in the US have gone to great lengths to brand themselves this way, but really they are neoliberals who have bought into every aspect of conservatism except maybe the most depraved social views from the alt right, which they excuse as “just an opinion”. They love to play both sides and act like they have some moral/intellectual high ground because they consider “both sides” when really they are already waist deep into right-wing ideology.
Exactly. Whenever this conversation comes up I ask for people to give me Republican policies presented and pushed that aimed to help the middle class??
Other than tax cuts for the rich the Republican party has ZERO ideas on how to tackle anything that would help the average American. Healthcare? Nothing. Gun control? Nothing. Climate change? Nothing. Infrastructure? Nothing. Jobs? Trickle down give tax cuts to the rich that’ll solve it! Sure it hasn’t worked the last 40 years now but just more tax cuts for billionaires bro!
It’s insane there’s even a handful of people who think republicans are anything but self serving fascists that would step over corpses to enrich themselves even marginally at the expense of anything and anyone else.
Yet here we are, it’s an actual debate, it’s like children who refuse to admit they stole that candy from the store… Children. Vile, fat, rich, spoiled, semi-conscious, thoroughly uneducated, self entitled, racist, backwards, moronic children. Hundreds of millions of them.
As a moderate, this isn’t true in the least. People like that aren’t actually moderate, they are just masking.
Every moderate I know is currently voting Democrat because it’s obvious the Republican party has gone off the rails. The crazy stuff isn’t the part we listen to, and they have stopped backing the non-crazy part.
Do you consider Joe Biden a moderate?
I consider all politicians corrupt, but he’s probably less than most. Their politics are money and power. I don’t think many politicians at that level genuinely buy into either party, except for insofar as it gets them power.
Sure, but if you give these “moderates” a seemingly reasonable Republican candidate who puts up a good front and who also won’t say the quiet parts out loud, they will vote for that candidate every time. E.g., if Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney ran again, they’d vote for them in a heartbeat. Then those candidates will do almost all the same things Trump did, just without drawing attention to it, such as lowering taxes on the wealthy, installing ultra conservative or big-business friendly judges, starving social services, removing regulations, etc.
Moderates have no principles, so this is always okay with them.
None of this is true. But, hey, it gives you more straw people to hate, so knock yourself out.
I haven’t distorted any argument you made. You provided a very fence-sitty statement “all politicians are bad” just like all the other “enlightened centrists”, then proceeded to accuse me of lying and not making good arguments when you yourself are unable to make actual arguments, critically about this subject, or otherwise bring something to the table. Is that a typical pattern for you?
I propose “interlopers”. If you’re not against the fascist regime, you ARE the fascist regime.
If two people disagree, then they are both equally right. Like in the case of rape! There’s two sides to it after all…
Didn’t nazis make the trains run on time? Those Democrats should be all over this
Ironically, despite the common saying, the trains were apparently even worse during the Nazi government than they were before.
Removed by mod
Considering they were led by a failed art critic who basically stayed a butthurt drunk corporal after WW1 ended, it checks out.
Removed by mod
It’s amazing what a boost your economy can get when you steal the property of millions of people after shipping them off to concentration camps.
It’s probably the Republican plan to end the national debt.
Removed by mod
Almost like they kicked significant parts of the railway work force out and sent them to death camps in the name of opening those jobs up for mediocre “ubermensch”
I would imagine the people on the trains back then were in no hurry to reach the destination.
At least Mussolini drained a swamp.
They didn’t.
The moderates are the Democrats.
There is no left.
Democrats are right-wing. Republicans are now far right.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Hey that’s not fair, as part of fascism they also want healthcare (for the right people) and education (that reinforces their prejudices).
I see this sentiment expressed more often by tankies, enlightened centrists, and Krazy Konservative Kommenters than mainstream media sources. Usually in reference to economic policy (and in fairness, the differences there are pretty subtle if we’re looking at the mainstream).
What I’m seeing in media is an attempt to listen to “both sides.” It’s just that one side has grown more and more detached from reality, so airing their crazy unchallenged alongside a more normal perspective makes it look like the sides are on equal rhetorical footing. It’s like what you get in a debate with Donny T and Biden.
Biden: Normal liberal policy ideas, maybe we leave the queer folks alone, maybe we do a little something on climate, etc.
SmallHandsOrangeBoy: Incoherent frothing about the immigrants, the gays, the “woke mind virus”
Reporters: And here are the candidate’s positions, clearly no further comment or observation is required. Best not question the froth lest we be accused of bias!
Feels like a lot of reporters are either unused to dealing with a rising fascist bloc, hampered by corporate meddling, or complicit.
The media always wants two people with diametrically opposed ideas and opinions in their tv debates. Like with climate change debates. Instead of inviting 2 people of the 99% of scientist who generally agree about human made climate change but disagree on the details they invite the disgraced 1% “scientist” with a fringe opinion who’s clearly in the pocket of big oil or a professor who isn’t even a climate expert.
So true. And it makes for good TV, plus the ragebait drives engagement on the socials (writing that made me ill).
It’s not the purpose of the media to faithfully report “both sides”. That’s the problem in a nut shell. The idea that there are always two sides to every issue and that they are equal. That they are always equally legitimate. Media treats it like a sporting event, like a debate club. That is a total warping of journalistic principles.
The job of journalists is to report truth. To find truth and inform the people.
Center right Democrats and far right Republicans, if we’re talking about how they compare with parties in other countries.
One side wants to break up families, abolish free speech, trans kids and make everyone attention slaves to big companies. The other side just wants freedom and happiness
(I dont accually believe this, just how the opposite side would make the same tweet) You cant believe the world is this black and white 💀
I honestly thought you were still talking about Republicans who brag about wanting to break up families, abolish free speech and trans kids, and make everyone slaves to corporations
Haha very true, its almost like the isnt any opposition
But how would banning books equate to free speech? I suppose there aren’t straight justifications for everything, that’s just part of it.
ever heard of the story of the two santas?
I assume the title is aimed at that both parties badmouth one another in extreme, cherry-picked and oversimplified ways right?
The issue is that the US has two right wings parties, with one being quite a bit further right.
There is no extreme left party in the US.
There are plenty of people who talk about extreme left ideas, but none of them are elected politicians.
The bigger issue is that all countries are fairly right wing. They’re all capitalistic and nationalistic, putting them on a crash course for war and suffering. Exploitative systems just can’t work like they used to. It’s too easy for disadvantaged people to cause apocalyptic damage to those that exploit them.
But there are extremist leftists, and disagreeing with them doesn’t make you a rightist nor a fascist as they so often claim - just like disagreeing with right-wing extremism and trumpism doesn’t make you a tankie/commie/whatever extremist).
Plenty of left-leaners disagree with the far left and plenty of right-leaners disagree with the far right.
Removed by mod
They’re all paid by over-rich exploit everyone else as slaves. Give 'em a little credit. They’re not completely racist!
I think the title is mocking enlightened centrists. I am not sure if you’re implying this and I misunderstood your comment.
It’s basically the whole platform for one party, but sure.
“Democracy” my ass lmao. You only have one choice.
A revolution is long overdue indeed.
Then make that “choice” a choice for Ranked Choice Voting at the local level. The Constitution allows for this option. The founding fathers didn’t have access to the math that proves FPTP is the worst possible voting system, despite England using FPTP since the middle ages, or as much as 600-800 years at that point.
The problem is the American system of democracy as it is currently organized is too geared to protect the interests of the ruling class.
I compellingly agree that ranked choice or proportional representation would alleviate many of the issues we have, but, unlike many epochs of human history, we are literally running out of time.
too geared to protect the interests of the ruling class
That is literally what it was designed to do, so it’s doing its job. The founding fathers hated democracy but needed a way to make it appear like they didn’t with the constitution. As AdrianTheFrog pointed out, one of the federalist papers for a US government class literally just admits:
“A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the union, than a particular member of it” - James Madison, the guy who drafted the constitution
None of this will change without a revolution. So I agree with the post.
This is such an incredibly privileged stance
Millions must die; this will make things better. /s
Oopsies the revolution just turned into multiple parties fighting for power, enjoy your slog for the next decade or more.
If there’s one thing Privs hate it’s when you point out they just outed themselves having an opinion only a priv would think is a reasonable thing to think.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
But my feelings!
Warnings don’t reflect reality. They prevent one. An effective warning never describes the reality in which it exists. That’s what makes it an effective warning.
A version of the preparedness paradox, I suppose.
Removed by mod
Out of the loop: what’s there about women not being able to vote or own property? Thanks!
Republicans have begun to resurrect the idea of household head exclusive enfranchisement, IE only the family patriarch can vote
I’m sure it’s just a complete coincidence that this policy mostly disenfranchises women, younger voters, and renters, all of whom lean democrat.
Woah, that’s cringe. Thanks for letting me know!
Wait until they find out about all the single moms who are heads of households
