PoliticalAgitator @ PoliticalAgitator @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

793

Joined

2 yr. ago

Welcome to every single vote for the rest of your life. They won't even be human soon.

On paper. The war in Iraq involved the largest anti-war protests the world had ever seen, across multiple democratic countries.

They pushed forward with the war regardless, a policy that was continued by subsequent governments, regardless of party.

It's one of thousands of places with underfunded mental healthcare but one of a handful that pairs it with extremely permissive gun laws.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter if the pro-gun crowd is correct and the gun violence problem would be eliminated by simply treating every single man, woman and child in America for vague "mental health problems", including people who don't want treatment, to an extent far beyond our current medical science, so completely that they will never relapse, not even for the second it takes to draw a weapon and fire.

If they want to build all that so they can go back to indiscriminately selling guns to people, they can go right ahead. Until they have though, the gun laws in America clearly don't work to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people.

I'm sure it has nothing to do with selling guns to men who can't control their emotions.

He's just repackaging the usual "hiring quotas" idiocy where they pretend that there's people in board rooms saying "well this man has every degree that Harvard offers but unfortunately we need to hire a woman so we're giving the job to this high school drop out that was visibly drunk in the interview".

The reality is that any job opening ends up with a pool of candidates, all of which are qualified for the job and it won't be any different here.

But they can't say the truth, so they say shit like this instead.

And you won't get rid of Netanyahu until you get rid of Hamas and groups like them.

The reason the conflict hasn't been resolved after decades isn't a lack of hot takes, it's because it's stalemates the whole way down.

Largely, the problem is that the far-right shows up.

No matter how tiny the power grab, they'll have someone there to grab it, often unopposed.

It's cool, we'll just get rid of the second amendment instead, making all of the pro-gun decisions void anyway. If the pro-gun community wants to follow through on their threats to become domestic terrorists over it, that's fine, since 80% of domestic terrorists are already legal gun owners.

There's no other way for it to go. The pro-gun community hasn't shown the slightest interest in addressing gun violence, despite over 20 years of insisting that they (and they alone) have the answers.

On paper. The reality for the last 20 years is that it's for handing out tax breaks, bailouts and deregulation to the rich -- a job they were groomed for since their earliest days at their very expensive schools.

They know. That's why they do it. Most of them remember the days when it was the same for gay men.

You already know the answer to that but you asked the question anyway because it serves as self-entitled neoliberal/libertarian propaganda.

And of course if there was an actual city out there modelled after your libertarian paradise, there's not a chance you'd move there, let alone be happier there.

But boy would I love to see it.

Because no matter how much of your personality you devote to being a miser, your actual, actual wealth is a piss puddle next to an ocean.

You'd be a functional slave with every dollar you earned being immediately extracted from you as you're charged by the foot for the roads you use, living off post-FDA Starbucks that you don't know has baby-killing levels of formaldehyde in it (again) because the one media company left was paid to not report it.

But hey, at least you wouldn't be paying 1c a year for someone else's birth control.

Pisses me off that CEOs never get fired for their bullshit and get to "retire" or "resign" like they didn't just make the most boneheaded decision that severely hurt the company.

They're rich people and it's not considered acceptable to hold rich people accountable in even the most trivial way.

Social media is the closest we've come to mind control and many of the people with means to manipulate it are dogshit.

Even if we pandered to your every preference, I doubt it would satiate the greed of someone who'd rather see children punished than contribute fractions of a penny to prevent it.

So why make society worse if it won't even make you better?

They welcome the evasion since they don't actually want their number of ad impressions going down. They were just letting you know that under no circumstances were you to show anyone what's behind the curtain.

I think initially, he just wanted to do his duty as a right-wing reactionary and use his influence to shame Twitter for deplatforming white supremacists, likely having heard that Truth Social was eying up a plot next to every other dead social network that pandered to fascists.

But like every other figurehead of that crowd, below the bluster and bravado lies a very tiny dick and his preferred method of wearing shorts in the shower is spending millions of dollars in an effort to convince everyone he is the smartest man in the world.

So pretentious screeds about "free speech absolutism" quickly turned into self-aggrandizing posts about how he could do it better and before he even got a chance to call someone a pedo, he'd accidentally made some comments about buying Twitter that he was legally obligated to follow through on.

He tried to squirm out of it for a while, muttering about bots and whatnots, but it seems his lawyers informed him that yes, he had also bragged away his opportunity to back out and he was going to have to follow through.

And so a couple of months later, he walked into a mostly empty office with 4 goals in mind.

First, he needed to get far-right propaganda back on track. Too many people had started to see through the "we're not neo-nazis we just have the opinions, goals and pundits", plausible deniability schtick and the far-right funnel just wasn't flowing how it used to before all the domestic terrorism.

That kicked off a flurry of actions like unbanning mentally ill hip-hop artists, internationally embarrassing politicians and pseudo-intellectuals who'd spent decades striving to achieve mediocrity before they said something bigoted and were immediately placed on a pedestal.

Second, he needed to self-soothe after doing something so stupid in front of so many people. $44 billion dollars down the drain! That's not what the smartest man in the world would do! Especially not if money was the only thing that made him noteworthy in the first place.

So he marched around unplugging things and pretending he knew what he was talking about and wasn't just lifting key phrases from more intelligent people like a celebrity parrot.

It was an unconvincing show for anyone in the industry who quickly realised he barely had a junior-level understanding of a single moving part, let alone the hundreds that keep a site like Twitter online.

Third, he needed to claw back every penny he could, carefully balancing things like "gleefully firing all the heartbroken staff" with other important business like "indulging his teenage edgelord".

But each new idea is even more dogshit than the last. He bought a sinking ship and he's trying to bail out the water with every piece of cutlery in the kitchen. It's only a matter of time before the office supplies turn up on ebay.

And fourth and, probably most importantly: "Are there any women in this place worth manipulating into prostitution? I need everybody back in the office tomorrow for a face to face"

Sure, but its valuable to dirty poor people. Privitisation is valuable to the wealthy.

Honestly, he sounds like a pretty generic right wing politician to me.

Wants to cut public services to the bone because he doesn't need them nor have any respect for those who do. His solution involves letting the private sector charge twice the cost for half the service with the wealthy skimming as much as they can off the top before the inevitable collapse and bail out.

Sure, he's put the pig in a different dress to round up the reactionary, idiot and religious nutjob votes but under it is still the same bullshit neoliberalism that has been failing the 99% for decades.

Aww that's not fair, he has plenty in common with internet libertarians; he's greedy, puts his own self-interest above even those he is supposed to love, is obsessed with money and stuffing as much of it into his own pockets as he can, doesn't think anything through, etc.

Honestly, the highest bidder could have bought his soul and deep down, isn't that what truly makes someone libertarian?

That wouldn't surprise me since WSB and The_Donald used an identical playbook to grift an identical demographic and it also wouldn't surprise me if the same group of sleazy people seeded both of them.