Excrubulent @ Excrubulent @slrpnk.net

Posts

8

Comments

2,240

Joined

2 yr. ago

Yes, it would. Covid got around because of its long dormant period and high transmissibility. It's only gotten less lethal over time as it's mutated. Turns out killing your host is a poor reproductive strategy.

Not for lack of trying, the corruption of the US spreads wherever it can. When a large tree is dying, it rots from the centre of the trunk first. The rot at the core of capitalism started where the most power resides, and that's why the US is such a horror show. You aren't immune from it, it just hasn't rotted as badly where you are.

If you hear David Graeber talk about it, the IMF and the World Bank's power was shattered after occupy, countries weren't willing to accept their terms anymore because the word was out that leaders who did that were selling out their own people. Things changed, but there are powerful hegemonic forces at work to stop us from hearing about it. They want us to believe we are powerless.

Just because you didn't storm the bastille yet doesn't mean nothing is being done. Most direct action is on the ground and invisible. That's why it looks like decades pass with nothing happening, then overnight everything changes.

This is a weapons expert with experience with both of the types of weapon you're talking about and he says it's definitely not a VP9 or a welrod. https://youtube.com/shorts/POubd0SoCQ8

He pointedly makes no comment on all the people celebrating.

A lot of people in the comments seem to agree that this guy probably knew the gun wouldn't cycle and was expecting to clear malfunctions, which is why he seems unbothered by them. He may not have had access to legal and proper methods of suppression, hence the poor setup. Probably for the best because a registered suppressor would be easily traced.

Yeah, and that's all true, but in the comment I replied to was room for the implication that "mob justice" is a problem somehow.

We're told it would be chaos, some great threat to society, but like, the only examples of mobs that I can think of doing any real damage are groups whose immediate aims were supported by the ruling class. Lynchings in the US south were openly permitted and encouraged by the entrenched white supremacist police state. Witch burnings were encouraged by the state to disenfranchise women from power over their own bodies, and they laid the foundations for capitalism.

Then those horrific examples of state oppression are presented to us as examples of the horrors that await if we were to ever stop bowing to that same state and take matters into our own hands.

Even if the person making the comment didn't intend to reinforce that notion, it's a default assumption for many people and I didn't want it to stand unchallenged.

They're androgynous from this angle, but that chin is prominent. It could be a guy with a very pretty face.

When everyone is on the list, noone is.

"Mob justice" is a boogeyman invented to distract you from the fact that the cops and the state give you no justice at all.

Fair enough, sorry I assumed your position on that.

Gun control is fundamentally a right wing policy. Just because it aligned with *some people's preferred right wing party on a culture war wedge issue doesn't make it right.

Like look at California; the only reason their gun laws are so strict is because they were scared of the Black Panthers doing open carry observation of police. It was a targeted, racist attack on a political movement that was completely bipartisan, because the political class has solidarity with one another against the rest of us.

Like what do *liberals think about abortion bans? Do they reduce the number of abortions? What about drug & alcohol bans? Do they work? We know these things don't actually stop anyone from doing anything, they just make those behaviours more dangerous.

So why do *they think gun bans will actually be effective? Do *they think the cops will actually use it to protect children? They had all the power at Uvalde and they used it to keep parents from saving their kids.

The US is an unprecedentedly violent police state with the largest military, the largest criminal population in history and a fetishistic obsession with guns, of course their children turn to guns to take out their rage. That's what they see modelled all around them.

Edit: removed the words that assume this is the position of the person I'm replying to. I still stand by the points.

Always has been 👩‍🚀🔫👩‍🚀.

But actually that article is pretty thin. I believe it was originally a joke about how many astronauts are from Ohio, so they'd get to space and it would turn out the whole planet was Ohio. It is in fact a reference to real world thing, it's just a very obscure and absurd reference.

I recall when Bernie briefly forced the subject into the public consciousness before the Dems forced him out and buried it again, there was a study done on this. It found that when universal healthcare was described in plain language without buzzwords that have been poisoned by propagandists, something like 70-80% of Amerians support it.

Your story doesn't make a lot of sense, but there are a bunch of extra details that don't appear in either of the articles I've seen:

https://www.wptv.com/news/national/chris-gaither-11-year-old-boy-shoots-intruder-who-cried-like-a-baby
https://globalnews.ca/news/2675426/he-started-crying-like-a-little-baby-11-year-old-shoots-suspected-home-invader/

So if you want to discuss the story's details, maybe we should agree on those details, and you can give us something more than "trust me bro".

Also, eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable, and traumatic events make it even less reliable, and when you're talking about a kid it's even harder to get straight. I ask my kid what they said 10 seconds ago and they can't give me a straight answer. Maybe just fucking lay off the child. Jesus christ.

It's by the same guy that made The Stanley Parable, but it's more serious.

It's the same themes from Stanley Parable except made into an actual story instead of one long recurring joke.

I'm not saying the long recurring joke is bad - someone will probably hate that I said that - but they're just two different things that both do their different things very well. The Stanley Parable explicitly never builds to any kind of conclusion.

Lemmy isn't a monolith, and understanding that the fediverse has set itself up as an alternative to centralised platforms, I don't think we should be surprised when trolls who tend to get banned on those other platforms find their way here.

Of course we're going to see a lot of reactionary opinions here. These are the reactionaries that are too reactionary for reddit. They've learned to be less overt in their views because lemmy can excise a whole instance that's just reactionary.

I'd say right now they're trying to radicalise the normies. Vote manipulation is probably part of that strategy to make their views look more accepted than they are.

I've been showing my kid some hbomberguy videos, and they started with the new ones. When we went back a bit they were like, "wow, he looks so young".

It was completely the wrong way round to me, but I couldn't argue with it.

The commonality here is how expensive the things are. Scalping is another one of those things that's trashy if you're poor and classy if you're rich.

Such a good analogy. I'd go further and say all laws are like this. They don't actually stop anyone from doing anything, and they don't even guarantee anything will happen to them as a consequence. They're just lines on the road.

We have to kill him, or else he'll die!

That's not a gotcha, it's very simple. Doctors decide whether a fetus is viable outside the womb, and if it is, then it's a birth. The line for this keeps shifting earlier as neonatal medicine improves. Doctors aren't going to destroy a child that can live, they took a hypocratic oath. Once it's outside on its own, "my body my choice" no longer applies.

In fact, the opposite is frequently a problem, where enormous intervention is given to keep an extremely premature child alive when all you are doing is guaranteeing them a lot of suffering. There are plenty of parents who wish in retrospect that the option to simply not intervene had been offered, because they see how much pain their child goes through. It is already perfectly fine, legally and ethically, to decide that a child is simply too weak to have a good quality of life. You can offer them milk (if they feed on their own that is a sign of good health and probably won't ever happen with a case like this), but after that hold them and say goodbye.

People talking about late term abortions and killing babies after ripping them out of the womb at 40 weeks are completely divorced from reality. That's Alex Jones level bullshit.