Earlier, when the trial resumed after lunch, Trump was being very polite to the court. Now it seems he’s back to his old self.
On the stand, Trump has started to air his complaints with the case once again.
“This case is a disgrace," the former president says. He goes on to claim there is "murder on the streets of New York and the attorney general here is watching every little move”.
During this outburst, Judge Engoron looks ahead with a straight expression and remains silent.
When Trump has finished, Engoron says he defers to the prosecution on how much they want to allow Trump to speak off topic.
Engoron says Trump is a “broken record”, to which Trump replies that the prosecution “keeps asking the same questions, over and over”.
Attorney Kevin Wallace keeps his calm, saying the questioning is “very close to the end”.
Its a very weakly sourced state sponsored media article reporting on their state enemy. You have to be willfully credulous to believe their claims without further proof.
That statement is illogical. You must have huge problems with the simplest logic to argue that. You can’t bent logic by twisting what I said. Stop clowning.
I swear some of these people have never even been to China. I’ve had the opportunity, and had a lot of Chinese expat friends. I will say THEY believe the same as rest of the world does on a lot of these issues. I was told in no uncertain terms by my tour guide not to say anything about “things you might have heard” when I went to Tienanmen Square. And trust me, the soldiers everywhere with automatic weapons were enough to dissuade me from THINKING about it.
There are a lot of differences that can be passed off as unpleasant cultural differences (like the one guy was a second class citizen and couldn’t get a city passport because he was from a village… the other guy had a full country Visa with zero effort because he grew up in Beijing), but other things “yeah, we’d look up the truth on all that stuff, but we had to work hard to get around the censors and some of our friends got in caught and got in trouble for doing it”.
These tankies never seem to cover the part where the Chinese government is ACTIVELY suppressing this stuff in China. I could walk up to the site of the Bonus Army massacre and LOUDLY announce “I can’t believe the US government opened fired on American troops here over a peaceful protest” and not so much as draw police attention.
So you’re ok with guys with machineguns keeping people to afraid to ask about the Tianenmen Square Massacre because you think it’s “misrepresented”? As an American in China who thoughts things were overblown, I left China 100% sure the Massacre is as bad as I was taught, because of the way the Chinese government behaved in Tienanmen Square when I was there.
And you really feel that it’s ok that there’s human rights advocates serving time for the crime of “inciting others to knowingly participate in unauthorised assemblies” about the Tianenmen Square Massacre, like Chow Hang-tung? Do you approve of jailing for speech where most countries will, at worst, have civil libel charges?
What’s the most severe penalty you would approve of for people who witnessed and survived the massacre recounting stories that are absolutely true to them? Maybe execute them all?
In my world, EVEN if the victim witnessed the event incorrectly, this is at best Witness Intimidation, and at worst its own human rights violation.
You seem to be projecting a lot of things that don’t have a firm basis in external reality. Are the guys with machine guns there to intimidate tourists, or are they there because Tienanmen Square is right in front of the Chinese equivalent of the White House and several other important buildings that require high security? The incident (which, let us be clear, also involved armed insurrectionists with incendiaries and commandeered rifles) wasn’t even the last major violent event in the area, as people did die actually in the Square some time later when Falun Gong members set themselves and a small girl on fire in protest of the group being banned!
The thought police you are imagining seem, if anything, to be a much better case for you being wrong. However you might feel intimidated in the moment, clearly once you left you understandably made a firm association between the Square and machine guns!
Furthermore, you’re making silly excuses for liars. There were people who weren’t even there for the supposed massacre (see the video) who were accounting very peculiar events in lurid detail, like tanks running over inhabited tents and then mulching them and such. Do you think some scared college student is going to have an anxiety-based hallucination that causes them to think they were places they weren’t and saw things that have probably never happened anywhere? When does that happen besides severe schizophrenics and children who aren’t processing that they just had a nightmare?
It seems to me that you are reaching for excuses, especially since you are disregarding the numerous witness, both domestic and foreign visitors, who all saw that there was no massacre in the Square as the media hysterically portrayed. Leaked state documents over the years (from ambassadors and such) only affirm this further. I can look up some if you like.
You seem to be projecting a lot of things that don’t have a firm basis in external reality
I’m not sure why you would say that.
Are the guys with machine guns there to intimidate tourists, or are they there because Tienanmen Square is right in front of the Chinese equivalent of the White House and several other important buildings that require high security?
Considering the exact placement, I would say the former. Considering their non-presence at other equally important locations? I would also say the former.
The incident (which, let us be clear, also involved armed insurrectionists with incendiaries and commandeered rifles) wasn’t even the last major violent event in the area,
Do you know what double-think is? Was the military killing armed insurrectionists, or was it all made up? Or were they standing their with tanks and watching the armed insurrectionists kill everyone? I trust Amnesty international more than you, and more than propaganda recordings from the Chinese government. Not as someone with a prejudice against China, either. The narrative makes sense, where yours does not.
when Falun Gong members set themselves and a small girl on fire in protest of the group being banned
Are you implying that the soldiers with machineguns were ther ebecause Falun Gong members set themselves on fire? And not because of the internationally known incident that, whether true or not, China is clearly censoring and jailing people for publicizing?
However you might feel intimidated in the moment, clearly once you left you understandably made a firm association between the Square and machine guns!
You’re absolutely right. I did not think China were death dealers before Tianenmen Square, but now I do. They succeeded in terrifying me, and I think that was their intention. I was sure as hell afraid to speak truth aloud in China.
Furthermore, you’re making silly excuses for liars
Why should I believe you over pretty much every unbiased body in the world?
There were people who weren’t even there for the supposed massacre (see the video) who were accounting very peculiar events in lurid detail, like tanks running over inhabited tents and then mulching them and such
Are you referring to the on-site live announcers saying they were witnessing it in real time, and the grisly follow-up photos that China was unable to suppress of a line of corpses with tank-tread sized crush marks destoying their bodies? Are those the lie? All the photos that show half naked and unarmed people killed by large military vehicles were fabricated? Or did “armed insurrectionists” bring tanks?
Do you think some scared college student is going to have an anxiety-based hallucination that causes them to think they were places they weren’t and saw things that have probably never happened anywhere?
No you’re right. People can have panic-based hallucinations when tanks open fire. And the first thing they’ll do is try to take photos of it. And no matter how hard you try, the photos come out eventually. Let me reiterate, photos of bodies crushed by tanks.
It seems to me that you are reaching for excuses, especially since you are disregarding the numerous witness, both domestic and foreign visitors, who all saw that there was no massacre in the Square
I’ve seen photos of the massacre. I have heard witness testimonies that corroborate those photos, and witness testimonies that do not. I am aware of several governments (including my own) that have used false or intimidated witnesses to try to hide an atrocity. Why EXACTLY do you see me as “reaching for excuses”? Do you think I WANT any government to mass-murder its protestors?
At what point should I throw out every piece of evidence I’ve ever seen in my life and believe this? How would you prove to an outside observer that Tienanmen Denial is different from Holocaust Denial?
Do you know what double-think is? Was the military killing armed insurrectionists, or was it all made up? Or were they standing their with tanks and watching the armed insurrectionists kill everyone?
You are underestimating me. There was no killing in the Square itself, but there was fighting all around the surrounding area. The Square was killed with the highest degree of violence being hitting some protestors with batons when they didn’t disperse on the deadline after having many hours to comply.
My position is completely consistent.
and more than propaganda recordings from the Chinese government.
It was a documentary made by westerners! The people speaking were student leaders at the protest and all remain Chinese dissidents! What level of being a “friendly source” could even hypothetically meet your standard without agreeing with you? I can dig up literal internal memos from US political actors that were leaked and you would still call it Chinese propaganda!
I can dig it up for you if you’d like, though.
Are you implying that the soldiers with machineguns were ther ebecause Falun Gong members set themselves on fire? And not because
I’m saying there is a history of many violent incidents in connection with the Square and the government doesn’t want to let more happen. You literally suggest they are there to wordlessly pressure people into what to think despite that same incident that lead to that conclusion having the opposite effect on you! It’s a nonsensical psychodrama, not a cogent political observation.
No you’re right. People can have panic-based hallucinations when tanks open fire
As far as I know, the tanks never opened fire, it was all gunfire from the PLA side. It was an urban combat situation within Beijing (because it wasn’t on the Square itself, but slightly more closed areas) so having the tanks fire seems like it would be excessively destructive and hazardous. Then again, I don’t know.
And the first thing they’ll do is try to take photos of it. And no matter how hard you try, the photos come out eventually. Let me reiterate, photos of bodies crushed by tanks.
I think you might be thinking of some famous photos of what are clearly bikes strewn about and people taking cover.
I’ve seen photos of the massacre. I have heard witness testimonies that corroborate those photos, and witness testimonies that do not. I am aware of several governments (including my own) that have used false or intimidated witnesses to try to hide an atrocity. Why EXACTLY do you see me as “reaching for excuses”? Do you think I WANT any government to mass-murder its protestors?
I don’t know your life, I can’t say. You give the impression that you are a sensitive person who was traumatized and now you seek to affirm that trauma, but that’s just my impression. Atrocity propaganda is very effective, turns out, and western powers are happy to give you as much morbid slop as you can stomach. If you’ve seen any photos of people killed on the Square, feel free to reproduce them.
At what point should I throw out every piece of evidence I’ve ever seen in my life and believe this? How would you prove to an outside observer that Tienanmen Denial is different from Holocaust Denial?
[Aside from that being a hysterical comparison] When you speak so strongly about the evidence and then don’t produce it, you aren’t really giving me a reason to believe you. If I wanted to persuade you on the Holocaust, I’d have plenty of photos that I could show you of mass graves, piles of shoes, piles of gold teeth and fillings, nail marks on the doors of the gas chambers, and notably virtually no one who was kept prisoner in the camps who denied that killing and brutality were taking place! It’s not like we have people who were prisoners in Auschwitz saying “yeah, there were no gas chambers, no butchering, it was just a prison.” Plenty of Holocaust Deniers say that, but none were prisoners of Auschwitz.
And yet, I can point you to people who were actually at the Square and say no one was killed on it, meanwhile other people who were already gone by that time talk about viscera being washed down gutters. In the video I showed you, two people were there to see it and one person wasn’t, and you are literally defending the “witness testimony” of the person who wasn’t there! Furthermore, she says in the hotel interview before the Incident that [in so many words] it was her plan to create atrocity propaganda in order to “wake the Chinese people up”! She explicitly wanted stories of bloodshed for the sake of her political goals, to the point of trying to deliberately endanger students who trust her for the sake of them being harmed! What makes you think she wouldn’t lie when every fact about the situation also makes it impossible for her to be telling the truth?!
I don’t know what you seem to think about the billions of people who know about the Massacre and millions who know enough about it not to be convinced by you. You are taking the same tactic of other deniers, expecting me to have nothing but Tank Guy and my High School History book in my back pocket.
Further, you are now accusing ME of being broken or “sensitive” for simply knowing the Tienanmen Square Massacre happened. I’m going to apply the outsider test of faith here again (I know it won’t work, I don’t care). You sound exactly like a Holocaust Denier I dealt with a year ago.
After the hysterical comparison claims… are you asking me to post the grisly photo of a line of human bodies, crushed, with joints in wrong directions, or you won’t believe it’s true? I’m not trying to convince YOU. I know from “How to Respond to Tiananmen Trolls” (from anti-propaganda Doublethink Labs) that a video of it happening would do nothing but make you smile and say “see, no evidence”. I just need to provide a voice that the world is indeed round so that flat-earthers don’t get a better foothold.
As for the evidence, most people have already seen it and you’re just helping them forget it was there by pointing out that I haven’t bombarded YOU with articles and photos you would just deny. I would really love (hate) to hear your rebuttal to the disgusting photo of corpses crushed by tanks, but I will not be posting NSFL content in this place.
Also, for anyone reading, I’d like to remind people of one rebuttal to your Holocaust comparison response. YES, there are more pictures of the Holocaust than the Tienanmen Square massacre. The holocaust happened over TWELVE YEARS and there are dozens of photos. The Tienanmen Square Massacre happened on ONE day. And for the casual observer who might still be here, note that this wasn’t just some protest-turned-riot. It was a long peaceful protest that was ended by the march-in of the military. In fact, there were upper leaders in the Chinese government who wanted to NOT kill all the protestors, and instead find a peaceful agreement with them (Zhao Ziyang comes to mind) whose career ended for not being on board. But I guess they’d just be Tienanmen Square deniers too?
There’s literally nothing but a few obviously coerced confessions that counter the truth of the massacre. And you don’t care. Ultimately, Massacre deniers will just start defending China’s “necessary” action to kill those innocent protestors, as you’ve already started doing. What you did wrong was accidentally doing it while still pretending it didn’t happen. People will notice that.
A black and white world where objective measures of press freedoms are apparently inversely proportional to trustworthiness of said journalists.
Oh my god, are you seriously claiming you can objectively measure press freedoms while saying socialists live in a black and white world? Just want to give you a chance to walk back your statement
I am quite curious to know your methodology for measuring press freedom so we can compare and perhaps find something which can be considered locally objective.
You’re retreating into “locally” objective. In this topic you’re not going to get agreement on what constitutes press freedom, so it is pointless. My point is that the claim of objective press freedom existing is ridiculous. You walked it back, but to a position that still seems ridiculous to me.
For example, I dont believe there is such thing as a free press. Any org that can produce a press machine is going to influence that press, whether that is a government or private interests. Editorial freedom isn’t possible, editorial control just ranges from the subtle to the overt.
You are the only one making assumptions here. I want to find some common ground.
So let’s pull this thread. I agree that bias is inevitable, but do you believe this negates the value of even trying to protect press freedom? And if so, do you extend this to all forms of truth seeking?
So let’s pull this thread. I agree that bias is inevitable, but do you believe this negates the value of even trying to protect press freedom? And if so, do you extend this to all forms of truth seeking?
Of course bias is inevitable, Im saying institutional bias will always be enforced down the chain onto journalists and writers.
Can you give me your definition of press freedom? Because it seems contradictory if the owner of a press will influence what is published but journalists of that press somehow have press freedom.
Well so first of all, I don’t consider only corporate or state owned media outlets to be “the press.” But certainly, editorial freedom is a big part of press freedom. One media outlet can only exert editorial control over its own journalists. It cannot force editorial restrictions onto all media the same way a government can. I think this is pretty low hanging fruit when it comes to press freedom - individual bias can be averaged out, but centralized, legally enforced bias cannot. This feels axiomatic to me, but it may not be to others whichbis why I think these conversations are so interesting.
cannot force editorial restrictions onto all media the same way a government can. I think this is pretty low hanging fruit when it comes to press freedom
Yes they can, it is called private (as opposed to personal) property rights enforced by the state. The range of opinion will always be broadly supportive of the capitalist government.
Please read inventing reality or manufacturing consent. I am tired and I feel like you aren’t interested in learning, with or without changing your opinion.
I don’t know why you think I have not read those books. I’m quite familiar with both, and agree with many aspects of them. I assure you though, Chomsky is not a press skeptic they way I think you are implying. And not everyone who disagrees with you is ignorant. You are the one shutting down conversation and making accusations.
But either way, this is quite easy to back test. Is there no western media you can think of which is critical of Capitalism? Maybe even someone you just cited?
Based on what you’ve said you really need to read those books again.
But either way, this is quite easy to back test. Is there no western media you can think of which is critical of Capitalism? Maybe even someone you just cited?
Point out the flaw in this rhetoric like Parenti would, given you’ve read him.
The corporate media will always serve the elites over token dissent. And token dissent protects capitalists from Capitalism. He is quite funny and self aware when he wants be.
Trust me I get it. What I don’t recall is Parenti expressing general skepticism of press freedom as a first principle. He mostly argues that capitalism corrupts the media. Again, this is laughably self evident.
Parenti and Chomsky are more left-libertarians though. Chomsky in particular is a outspoken and vocal critic of Lenin’s centralism and is a vehement defender of press freedom. I would say that my ideas of press freedom are quite aligned with theirs, and it seems as if you are one who has fundamentally missed the message.
The corporate media will always serve the elites over token dissent. And token dissent protects capitalists from Capitalism. He is quite funny and self aware when he wants be.
So why did you say the silly thing you said in the first place? And why do you consider corporate press to be more free than government press?
Do you have proof that there is no dissent within socialist countries? Because based on my readings there is plenty of lively debate. Hell, you can look at streams of the vietnamese assembly.
I literally know nothing about Vietnamese politics. But I also don’t think I’ve made any assertion that press/individual freedoms are incompatible with socialism. In fact, I think I’ve been pretty clear about this forum “deserving a better brand of socialist”
Wow, what? Communists talk openly about propaganda… You have no idea what you’re talking about.
We are well aware what our biases are. We are trying to get westerners to see their own biases. Being called out as hypocrites feels like an attack, but when we say everyone have biases, we know it’s true about us too.
Absorb news from a wide variety of sources, including sources from other countries, and you’ll see that the BBC is in fact biased against China.
It takes time, and reading a lot, and you won’t get it from Lemmy/Reddit/twitter(or X or whatever now)/FB. Even ground news only has so many sources. And you know what, the BBC does great coverage for a lot of things, they are a pretty high quality source for a lot of news. But yeah, everyone has biases, and the BBC is biased against China.
It doesn’t mean that reports are false just because two states are enemies (which is an exaggeration).
If they were strongly cited I would not be criticizing people believing them. All sources are biased, the question is how factual a source is.
The BBC is strongly biased against China. If they make claims without proof the most logical course of action is to not assume they are telling the truth and not incorporate what they say into your beliefs. (Note that this is different than “assume they are lying”)
Aren’t these threads wild? These people don’t want to engage in actual discussion here. They just want to remove your agency by calling you brainwashed, do the sealion “source” thing, and then ad hominem away any sources you do provide.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - the world deserves a better class of communist.
They just want to remove your agency by calling you brainwashed
Unlike when the liberals in this very thread accuse people of being brainwashed or paid shills, because then it is righteous!
do the sealion “source” thing,
lmao what dastardly trolls they are to care about sourcing
and then ad hominem away any sources you do provide.
Like you’d ever accept People’s Daily or whatever. The “tankies” need to mostly rely on liberal outlets because you will discard reporting out of China (etc.) out of hand.
the world deserves a better class of communist.
If we had a better class of communist, you’d hate them too because you’d believe everything you’re told about them, just like you do with the existing breeds.
I have no doubt, every nation has secret police. I simply doubt they are doing what the article suggests theyre doing. It seems to me the article is interested in explaining why there aren’t many uyghur Muslims joining their narrative and why a lot of them are supportive of China and feel their culture is respected.
Usually in the US more by making it illegal to sign government contracts with any boycotters of Israel, or by preventing public funds from investing into any entities perceived as boycotting Israel. These things could be devastating to any businesses or non profits that work with the government, or any publicly traded companies (due to decreased investment). Technically boycotting Israel in general can’t be made illegal in the US, as that would be a free speech violation.
Okay. I keep seeing things that clearly point to something. But whenever anyone brings it up they are mentioned as a crazy racist conspiracy theorist. But sometimes conspiracy theories are true.
I’m not American. Is America (the goverment/ media/ Hollywood whatever) over represented by Jews that favour their own interest and the interest if Israel?
Is so what evidence is there and why does no one care?
Just to be clear I don’t think this is a some illuminati style super government. More like how in the past America was super racist and a lot of people would give a white person beneficial treatment over blacks. Like that but more hidden.
Israel is really against free speech. This law might in the future be used to make BDS a hate crime or some equally perverse analogy like that. Israel will gladly throw away other people’s rights for their own benefit (not least their neighbors’ rights), and they are completely throwing Jews in general under the bus, as it has been from the beginning:
Herzl described [Jewish] opponents of the Zionism he was proposing as “Jewish vermin”
In fact, the more anti-semitism rises in the world, the more Jews will believe they should move to Israel, thus serving the Zionist agenda. Israel might throw America under the bus too, just to get their way.
The current struggle is not Israel vs. Palestine or Israel vs. Hamas but Israel vs. human rights and freedom, and we do have to pick a side.
I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.
But to expound on that, some US states make people sign a pledge to not participate in BDS if they have a job or even just contract with the state.
It’s incredibly fucked up and few people talk about it.
Inside every major contract Missouri signs with a business sits a clause about boycotting Israel.
All but the smallest companies have to agree not to participate in any movement that aims to boycott, divest from or sanction companies in Israel.
Missouri isn’t alone. At least 36 other states have anti-BDS (boycott, divest or sanction) measures that bar state contractors from refusing to do business in Israel, or otherwise boycotting or divesting from the country or its occupied territories.
I know and I always thought that is bullshit, but making it (for all intends and purposes) illegal to boycot companies from another country is next level. That’s giving away freedoms of your own citizens purely to the advantage of another country. That is insane.
Isn’t it? And it has been going on since long before you and me heard about it. The best we can do for justice is to just spread truths like this, because the only reason injustices like that find so much success is that they are hidden and done in secret.
Just sounds like a rich dude to me. Like, I think this is the main reason he’s unpopular, but aristos often keep a harem and Diana herself seems overrated.
Him and his current wife visibly mocked Inuit throat singers and have a long history of being childish and rude during events that are supposed to honor them. Personally kind to whom?
When I signed up here, I genuinely thought this place was going to be better than Reddit. Seeing the difference in comments here and on Reddit for this exact same piece of news, just made me realise that this place is a piece of shit with absolutely zero empathy for anyone.
Reading is hard apparently. I said the difference in comments between here and reddit, meaning what I saw over there was NOT people wishing for his death.
Why would you have empathy for monarchs? It’s the ultimate form of nepotism, believing that they can rule an entire country because of their bloodline. If they don’t abdicate the throne and dissolve the institution, they don’t deserve respect.
give us one singular solitary good reason we should have empathy for this decrepit, cheating, silver spoon mouthed, tax leeching, sex pest, waste of money and attention
No one voted for the wanker, but we still have to pay to keep him and his incestous kin in riches while our fellow countrymen starve in the street.
He wants pity, he should abandon this hereditary rule bullshit and take all those unelected peers up in parliament with him back to the medieval age where they belong.
Nah its just a leftist echo chamber. They have sympathy for the working class, but are very prejudiced against the wealthy. Personally, I would guess Charles is a decent human being, like most people. Im sure hes done some shitty things over the course of a long and extremely public life, but pretty much everyone has. I disagree with the concept of royalty but that doesn’t mean I want all monarchs to drop dead. Not a lot of nuance on Lemmy.
Imagine pearl clutching for some ancient inbred royal dipshit. Literal medieval peasant brain. “Oh no won’t someone think of the million year old pervert who lived a long life full of luxury one can barely begin to comprehend” Fuck him, fuck his whole family, I hope every single royal gets aggressive untreatable cancer, that’s better than they deserve.
Mainly confused and surprised someone would support a monarch in the 21st century. You don’t even have the excuse that the queen has been in charge for your whole life so you feel obligated to support her out of a misplaced sense of loyalty or something. Some ancient failson gets to sit in a golden chair and you can’t lick his boots fast enough. It’s pathetic, you aren’t even worshiping someone who can claim they got to where they are on personal merit, he just had to wait for his mom to die and he almost couldn’t even do that! Monarchy is such a farce, I’d be embarrassed to support that shit
Not so, we have plenty of empathy for those who actually deserve it.
Palestine will be free, long live the PFLP, long live Ansar Allah, full support to the DPRK in it’s quest to free their southern siblings from beneath the heel of the genocidal American empire.
People get blinded by religious extremism. Those that don’t generally just want to live in peace and don’t want to fight wars to maintain a fragile government that wasn’t even that great to begin with.
We all like to think of ourselves as brave souls who would put down our lives for our ideals but at the end of the day most of us will not actually stand up when the time comes to it.
Afghanistan simply did not have the national consciousness necessary for Afghans to come together in opposition to the Taliban, which was united on ideological/religious grounds.
How? I’m genuinely curious how you understand an Arabic word being the US term for this well documented historic cultural fact that predates the creation of the United States
They’re not wrong that bachi bazi is outlawed by the Taliban, but characterizing it as a policy endorsed by the US is ridiculous. I also question how effective the Taliban ban on the practice is, just like I question the Taliban’s purported ban on opium cultivation. Generally when there is money to be made even the morality police turn a blind eye.
They made it illegal but allegedly it still happens and they don’t enforce it as much as you’d like to believe they do. Likely they ban it for international appearance
There’s a natural regimen to save yourself - you must cut out all gluten, eat meals consisting of horse/radish paste (that’s a paste made of horses and radishes), and drink at least 6 glasses of clam juice per day.
To be sure. A purebred dog the kids "kept secret" for several years after a culling. So only the kids knew the dog even existed. Sounds more like the kids found a puppy and justified keeping it by saying they always had it.
He should have gone all the way when he started the mutiny against Putin. He would be dead either way but at least he had the chance to take Hitler’s disciple with him to hell.
It’s simple: he spoke to an undercurrent of emotional resentment that a lot of people had and gave them permission to feel like they were good people (or at least not bad people) for feeling that way. Every seemingly logical explanation that the right twists into place in hindsight is only a justification for that gut reaction.
They want to feel good for having xenophobic, nationalist feelings. He gave them permission and said they were the good guys and everyone who disagrees is wrong. They only care about the facts that back up that perspective, everything else is conveniently discarded to defend their collective ego. 45’s narcissism helps him win this crowd because he’s been ignoring all inconvenient facts his whole life, and whenever that habit catches up with him he always has a scapegoat or 12 ready to go.
the emotional resentment comes from the perpetual victim mentality. the only way their way of life works is if they are constantly under attack by a villain of the week thats simultaneously incompetent and feeble but also sadistic and near unstoppable.
Yeah I guess there’s also underlying issues of feeling lost and insignificant in a complex world. Add to that economic struggle and a lacking class awareness and cognitive dissonance does the rest.
It doesn’t hurt his popularity with his supporters that so many hate him, it fits with the overall narrative of that constituency that people want them silenced.
You can see this is in how many conservatives complain about cancel culture silencing them, they use phrases like “you can’t say anything anymore” enmass on social media and run dozens of media publications and TV about how their voices are being silenced.
The irony of all this is ignored in the fury.
To really understand trump’s popularity you need to see him as a symptom not a cause. People who grew up without exposure to difference, in environments where difference was not tolerated, are feeling upset that the differences are being accepted.
They always believed the narrative that those differences just didn’t exist in the past and so the can see a rapid change in the world which they see as the destruction of the world they know.
Had they known that differences were their all along, only being kept out of sight, they’d know this isn’t a slide towards anything, it’s just a recognition of everything that was always already there.
You know when you’re at a park, see a dog, feel something squish under your foot, and then pick up your fooh to look at it? Yeah, exactly like that but in human form
The royal family, including Charles are big proponents of homeopathy. Let’s see how much homeopathy is going to help him now. I’m sure at least as much as those alternative methods Steve Jobs chose helped him, back then…
You’ve got to be kidding me. Is it corruption or stupidity? As in, are they selling vials of contaminated water as medicine or are they just known to trust pseudoscience?
The water/solvent isn’t even contaminated. It is deluted so thoroughly, you can’t even find a single molecule of whatever ingredient is supposed to show any effect.
It’s hypocrisy and the typical rich bozo alienation syndrome, they have easy and unlimited access to best medicine in the world, so it’s easy to forget that others don’t and promote charlatanerie. It could also be malicious if we look at how they don’t do anything against gutting the healthcare.
I live in western Japan, and felt this earthquake even here - it lasted as long as the 311 Tohoku quake, and an NHK news announcer was screaming for people in the Noto area to flee to higher ground because of the tsunami.
I had to watch another station because that woman was just yelling into the mic nonstop. I understand, but for someone watching from Saitama it was too much.
Thankfully, the warning was overblown. One wave hit the breakwater in Noto, but it wasn’t as big as they were expecting. More damage was done by a gas fire inside the city. And I think they’re trying to locate some people after a few buildings with old clay-shingled roofs collapsed.
After the video footage I seen from the last tsunami I would imagine that people are pretty fucking traumatized and will react that way for the rest of their lives.
I was traumatized from the footage and I have no personal connections to anyone in Japan.
Can confirm, was living in Tohoku during the 2011 disaster.
I live in Washington now and still do things like check geological maps to avoid living in areas that are prone to liquefaction and pay attention to signs so as to be aware of tsunami evacuation routes when I visit the coast.
As a wheelchair user who has the misfortune of needing to fly quite often: my go-to method when this happens (which is about 30% of the time) is to refuse to leave. That way, a nice bunch of burly security officers come and lift me off, saving me the days of pain that dragging myself on the floor causes.
It’s awesome living in a society that doesn’t give a shit.
So far, once security arrive and see that the person refusing to leave the plane is physically unable to leave the plane, the bat starts to get swung towards the airline. I’ve been lucky I guess in that the human factor always kicks in to my favour.
Once I had law enforcement called (I can’t remember where I was exactly - as frequent fliers can empathise with - but it was somewhere in east Asia, maybe China) to remove me and I was freaking out about being stuck into a prison, and when the officers arrived they took one look at me and started SCREAMING at the flight crew. If I hadn’t been stressed to the hilt and freaking about about the deadline I was missing I probably would have found it hilarious.
(Also sorry if I sounded facetious before, where I’m from being legless is slang for being drunk so I was making a joke that I now realise no one else will have got)
bbc.co.uk
Top