PoliticalAgitator @ PoliticalAgitator @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

793

Joined

2 yr. ago

Cool, sounds like you shouldn't be worried at all then. We'll ban the magazines and the guns that go in them and you can just use 3D printed ones instead.

I've got a better idea: we'll take your guns away and you can have them back once you've finished fixing all that shit -- which casually includes curing mental health problems far beyond our ability to treat, for every man, woman and child in America, including the ones that don't want help, for free, faster than someone can buy a gun.

Hold on tight to that smugness because you're only ever two weeks away from yet another mass shooting by yet another legal gun owner.

A hot take from the "it's because of video games, rap music and buildings having too many doors" crowd.

You don't need to be an expert at sexually abusing children to make child abuse laws and you don't need to know the calibre and capacity of 100 guns to see that the current laws are dogshit and can't keep guns out of the hands of even the reddest of flags.

Nobody gives a fuck what criminals and terrorists could hypothetically use, they care about what they are using, which in nearly 80% of mass shootings is a legal firearm.

Damn, sounds like gun laws don't work then. Better change them to increase background checks and waiting periods.

I know you really wanted to sound tough and cool but gun owners are constantly throwing tantrums about gun laws so you're not fooling anyone.

Considering the armed attackers have guns themselves

Thanks to legal gun owners and the deeply flawed systems they won't let anyone change.

Is the magazine size restrictions the only difference between the gun laws of America and Canada?

Just legal gun owner things.

But then who will you treat like shit?

Two sides of the same coin

You ever heard the phrase "do what you love and you'll never work a day in your life"?

Well some people love being abusive pieces of shit.

Authoritarianism requires the support of the military and a military that's full of LGBT people won't support authoritarians that wants to execute LGBT people.

It's got nothing to do with the actual quality of readiness of the military. It's theatrics to let minorities know they're not welcome, using the currently fashionable trigger word.

Honestly don't mean this as an insult, but you might want to consider being more concise, so that your point comes across better.

I'm cool with ranting. I enjoy the act of writing, blogs are long dead and it's important to articulate why so many things in the world are fucking shit.

If we all work together, it's been proven that it does turn things around

When?

The ones making Society horrible definitely win when no one pushes back.

They also win when people do push back, because thats how the game has been rigged. The extent of the public's power is making them win slightly less.

The only way to stop companies doing unethical things is strict regulations, ruthlessly enforced. The only times "consumer advocacy" ever works is when the government steps in, which is why the ultra wealthy go to so much effort to ensure they never do.

One good person in politics, with power, is worth a million people boycotting.

It wouldn't matter if they were drowning in money, if you told them they could have a few pennies more from each customer, they'll do it. It's how greed works.

Partly, this is because "the free market will solve it" is just a neoliberal lie. Sometimes, there's simply no other choice as corporations race each other to the bottom.

So this streaming service might have gotten shitty, espensive or unethical, but you can move to another right? Oh no, looks like they're shitty and unethical too, just slightly differently.

Then in six months time, they've each absorbed one another's shitty, greedy practises anyway, ensuring consumers are fully exploited with nowhere else to go.

But the true power of neoliberalism lies in its giant book of premade excuses, so neoliberals (or neoliberals in disguise) will of course read from the next page:

"Oh that's just because there isn't enough competition. We just need to deregulate heavily and allow companies to do whatever the streaming equivalent of dumping toxic by-products in the river is!"

But of course, that won't ever come true either. The companies that already exist will grow more profitable polluting the river and new entries into the market will be either stamped out, bought and stripped for parts or enshittified by the same greed over time.

Following the flowchart taught at exclusive, expensive schools the world over, the next excuse is to blame the consumers.

"Oh if people really cared, they'd simply stop buying things entirely. But they don't, because these companies continue to bring in record profits. So secretly, consumers actually love their chocolate being picked by child slaves".

While they do fight back with boycotts, public outcry and (in this case) things like password sharing and piracy, it's nothing companies can't crush if it looks like it might actually dent their profits.

At some point, consumers need to pick their misery and the choices are bleak but obvious.

They can accept the minor misery of advertising, even as they pay a subscription, just like the corporation knew they would.

They can escalate their own misery further by boycotting the entire platform or industry.

But the moral high ground doesn't make spending your few hours of personal time each day staring at the wall suddenly as entertaining as whatever content you're no longer watching.

Also, the company doesn't care. That was part of their calculations and they're still making even more money.

Or finally, they could maximise their misery and actually do something, like busting out the guillotines or becoming a politician that opposes neoliberalism yet is somehow allowed power.

So anyway, people are tired. The fight never ends and some people have fought it for 50 years already. Encourage them to take the third option by all means, but don't shame them for taking the first option.

They might already be miserable enough.

Although they were allegedly not treated according to laws, these animals suffered so future human trials can be conducted safely, not because of Musks ego.

What a noble sacrifice they were physically forced to make, locked away in cages and hidden from the public eye. /s.

While we don't know exactly what goes on in the minds of animals, we don't need some fucked up, transhumanist vanity project to see that animals have pain, fear, trauma and self-preservation responses that are comparable to ours.

It's no more ethical to torture animals in the name of bullshit luxury items then it is to torture children, but it's just as easy to hand wave away that cruelty by claiming "oh their emotions aren't as complex as ours and maybe all that screaming and crying and clawing at their face is just how they let other children know they're having a good time".

If you're casually convinced it's all worth it, you can fucking volunteer. Maybe there's valuable discoveries to be made by testing what happens when apologism and "allegedly" is forces sideways down someone's piss hole.

Well given that her fans skew young and female, why would they? The Republican party is just 3 world-ending death cults in a trenchcoat and their staunchest supporters openly brag about abusing and oppressing women.

Fuck I'm going to laugh if Taylor Swift takes their guns though.