WatDabney @ WatDabney @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts

0

Comments

213

Joined

7 mo. ago

Some kind of dark ages - yes.

I suspect it will be considered the Lunatic Age or the Misinformation Age or the Willfully Ignorant Age or something like that, since its most distinctive characteristic, in retrospect, is likely to be the oddity that the creation of the most efficient and comprehensive information-sharing system the world has yet seen led pretty much directly to a worldwide epidemic of ignorance, stupidity, irrationality, and insanity.

Yeah - we hear that same tired song and dance over and over again.

Funny though that when Democrats held the majorities, they somehow couldn't manage to accomplish much of anything, and blamed it all on the Republican "obstructionists."

If the Republicans really could obstruct them then, then they could obstruct the Republicans now.

Or if they really can't obstruct the Republicans now then the Republicans really couldn't obstruct them then.

Either way, they're liars.

One would think that a president using the authority of his office to exact vengeance on the people who investigated his past crimes would warrant at least some sort of response from the supposed opposition...

He’s a sex trafficker

Which is an incel dream job. He's just managed to make it a reality instead of fap material.

Tate is the main inspiration for my theory that "incel" behavior and attitudes aren't necessarily tied to involuntary celibacy.

I think it's more fundamental than that, and it's just that that personality type often ends up involuntarily celibate, which amplifies their bitterness and spite and misogyny.

But there's another distinctive type of "incel" who, through some happenstance or another, manages to get laid. They share the same bitterness and spite and misogyny as the celibate incels, but the fact that they actually can manage to get laid adds a layer of entirely unwarranted arrogance on top of that.

And Tate is the exemplar of that. He just radiates "incel" - only with an extra layer of arrogance on top of it.

Yes.

And even beyond that - hierarchical systems effectively reward and thus select for psychopathy.

People with morals, ethics, integrity and/or empathy will refrain from making choices that would conflict with their principles, while people without any of those things are free to pursue any course of action that will benefit them, with no concern for anything else.

So all other things being more or less equal, psychopaths actually have a competitive advantage in hierarchical systems.

And it shows.

If the world was a just place, it would cost them their lives, since by cutting the sole source of healthcare funding for many of the poorest Americans, they're effectively committing mass murder, so should be tried, and if convicted, sentenced just as any other mass murderers would be.

Or better yet, if they were just minimally decent human beings, they wouldn't condemn poor people to avoidable sickness and death in the first place.

So I'm assuming that, like the rest of the broligarchy, what he actually means by "free speech" is right-wing authoritarianism exclusively and what he actually means by "free markets" is monopolistic corporate capitalism.

He really is sort of pathetic.

It's weird and oddly discouraging. It seems like the individual most responsible for the oncoming collapse of the United States should be some sort of supervillain, but he's really just a desperately insecure and over-compensating wad of hair, bronzer and congealed fat with the emotional maturity of a spoiled three-year-old.

And meanwhile, his wannabe Rasputin sidekick is a desperately insecure and over-compensating middle-aged chuunibyou who's still trying, and pathetically failing, to be the edgiest 13-year-old, and to not think about the fact that everyone who knows him thinks he's an asshole.

As if it's not already bad enough to watch as the US is systematically destroyed, we have to watch as it's systematically destroyed by people who are so pathetic and creepy.

It's his way of saying "Thank you."

Behind closed doors, the consensus has been that other countries don't want to get dragged into the current war in accordance with NATO mutual defense agreements.

But since Trump insists that he can end the war, that's obviously not a consideration for him - by his claims, there will be nothing more standing in the way of Ukraine membership in NATO.

Which makes this announcement that much more significant - essentially what he's saying is that even after the main obstacle to Ukraine membership has been eliminated, the US will oppose it.

Why?

Because... no, Trump is not Putin's puppet. He's something even worse - a cringing sycophant, desperate for affirmation from his strongman idol.

psychopath /sī′kə-păth″/

noun

1. A person who engages repeatedly in criminal and antisocial behavior without remorse or empathy for those victimized.
2. A person with a personality disorder indicated by a pattern of lying, cunning, manipulating, glibness, exploiting, heedlessness, arrogance, delusions of grandeur, sexual promiscuity, low self-control, disregard for morality, lack of acceptance of responsibility, callousness, and lack of empathy and remorse.

I'm curious what happened to the NYT.

They've had basically no integrity at all for years now, just kissing whichever ass they had to kiss to keep their access. Even as recently as the campaign, they kissed Trump's ass until Harris got her initial groundswell, then they kissed her ass for a while, then when she faded they went back to kissing Trump's ass.

But lately they've been more critical of Trump and Musk than almost any other legacy media outlet, and even lost their all-important access as a result and are still critical.

So what happened between then and now? Why did they finally grow a backbone at this late stage?

Just a guess, but maybe they found out that kissing Trump's ass wasn't enough by itself when he tried to strongarm $100 million out of them like he did with Zuckerberg, and they told him to fuck off?

I don't know, but something sure changed, and not a moment too soon...

That's what Daddy Putin wants, so that's what Daddy Putin gets.

And you can be 100% certain that that blatantly wasteful spending is not going to be cut.

Meanwhile, paying people to oversee pollution levels and ensure that industries don't make it so that people are poisoned by the air they breathe - that's going to called wasteful spending and is going to be cut.

All so that a handful of billionaires can enjoy even more privilege.

This is just the tip of the iceberg.

It's not an accident that Muskntrump are slashing federal spending but Trump threatened a government shutdown to get the debt ceiling increased.

It's all sleight of hand. The budget cuts are intended solely to cripple departments and programs that benefit common people or inconvenience the wealthy and empowered few, and all of the money that's not spent on those programs and agencies (and more) is going be funneled directly into the pockets of the wealthy and empowered few.

NO money is actually going to be saved. It's just going to be redirected, to even more directly benefit the wealthy few.

So... Trump voters?

The Toddler-in-chief strikes again.

Oh look - the Democrats are going to fight fire with lukewarm criticism.

Yes, that will surely work.

As always, I just wonder if it's a pose or a delusion.

In much the same way that the Zionists have characterized any criticism of Israel as antisemitism, Democrats have characterized any criticism of themselves as "both sides." And it's for the same reason in both cases – so they can reject criticism out of hand rather than facing up to it.

For the professionals, it's simple, if loathsome - they get to feed at the money trough as long as they can continue to essentially pose as leftists but not really accomplish anything (since anything truly leftist would be at odds with the desires of the people and corporations who are keeping the money trough full).

For the rest though - the rank and file that just repeat the cant they're fed - what do they gain?

I've never been quite clear on that, but I assume it's that their self-images are wrapped up in the labels they wear, and one of those labels is "Democrat," and it only works as a boon to their self-images if it can't be criticized.

I can't see how that can be worth it though.