Obviously, I’m both being sarcastic and massively oversimplifying things. This is just one tiny splinter of the cause of fascism, not the entirety of it.
Honestly, I’m even more confused now. White supremacists were using it against “RINOs”
The original insult makes sense in that context (man who’s spouse is unfaithful), but in this diagram it was listed with oppression of identity and sexuality. The only way my brain seems to interpret that is by assuming the word is used in its fetish form which makes even less sense to me
In the diagram you can substitute that word for any non-mainstream sexual or gender thing. It really doesn't matter what - they'll scapegoat anything as long as it's a minority, elicits disgust from the in-crowd and reinforces any of the things it connects to with dashed lines.
Pedophilia is a good one because it relates to 'defending women & children', makes the enemy look weak, causes sexual anxiety and elicits disgust. Hence 'Save the children' and all that.
The diagram maps the conceptual framework behind it all - it's best not to get too literal about any of the individual words.
Genuinely wonder if there’s some correlation in there. It’d be fascinating if global acceptance of homosexuality would eliminate fascist tendencies. I’d watch that movie.
The human race is so dumb. We could be building spaceships and exploring the stars and the depths of the oceans. Instead we are being manipulated by propaganda to fight with each other while nefarious forces wrestle for power. This timeline sucks….
It sent me into a deep depression when everything revealed all at once how dire things really are. We had a lethal pandemic that killed MILLIONS of people become disputed, a meme and political slogan. We had a third of our people elect a literal stereotype of a con-man and try to overthrow the US Government to keep him in power, we’ve seen the return of nazis and sleazy pickup artists, we have people eating dangerous chemicals for social media attention, people deciding rules are no longer applicable to them, and it seems like anyone who babbles nonsense in a confident tone will gain a rabid cult following, while outside the world is literally starting to burn around us while people deny the very shape of our Earth.
And on top of all this, while people are struggling to find a path to truth and get through this, with any shred of belief in our potential and capability to rise above our worst natures, we now have a machine that can fool anyone into believing anything and it’s only getting more powerful, and it’s in the hands out-of-touch billionaires and mega-corporations and being distributed out to anyone who wants to use it for a small price.
Let’s start with housing? I’m all for exploration, but we don’t need 3 or 4 billionaires wasting resources, and innovation with non-compete contracts, when one central agency would be more efficient, freeing up resources to fix the logistics of feeding everyone, and housing everyone.
I don’t have an issue with space programs. NASA is great and the public gets a ton of useful tech from there. I doubt such discoveries will be provided by SpaceX and the like
After our office consistently heard from student, parents, and teachers about objectionable curricula, policies, or programs affecting children, we launched the Eyes on Education portal.
Our kids need to focus on fundamental educational building blocks, not political ideology - either left or right.
Eyes on Education is a platform for students, parents, and educators to submit and view real examples from classrooms across the state.
The Office of the Attorney General will follow up on materials submitted to the portal that may violate Indiana law using our investigative tools, including public records requests, and publish findings on the portal as well.
To view examples or submit to the portal, select the school corporation and name of the school and upload your documents.
Upon submission, someone from our office may contact you for additional information or clarification.
Submissions to the portal will be reviewed and published regularly.
this is the most ridiculous rhetorical doublespeak I’ve seen in a while. kids need to focus on education, not political ideology, so let’s shove some political ideology down their throats? And, of course, the ass-covering BS logical absurdity that anything “objectionable” must, certainly, be unsafe for children.
by the time I was in school - the age we were reading Silverstein - was the mid-late 80s. he’d a had couple banned by then, but my teachers were in love with him, so I got to read most of his books as a kid. what books of his weren’t assigned were to be found in our school’s library and were often fought over. we had a school that really pushed a curriculum that relied heavily on using both the school and local public library for research, even in elementary school. I remember my parts being annoyed at how often they had to take me to the library for even basic schoolwork.
I loved it.
I really lament that, today, with the internet, there isn’t a central public repository of trustworthy information for research. the closest is Wikipedia, and, for what it is, it’s pretty fucking great. It’s a great jumping-off point for anyone to start learning on any subject, and I’m super-glad it’s there.
bringing it back around, Shel Silverstein was a wry observer of humanity but poked his finger in the eyes of too many powerful critics. He had a way of opening the minds of people - especially children - that made people who would like to manipulate the weak scared that Silverstein’s message would make their efforts more difficult. It’s no wonder the would wish to silence him.
The theater adaptation of Where the Sidewalk Ends was one of our middle school plays at our decidedly “rural” school.
One mom had a problem with it, and it was only with the “rebellious” bits. She shut up when every other parent rolled their eyes at her. It’s crazy how attitudes shift.
TitleBBBBBBBBBRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPsnnnnniiiiiiffffffffffff…oh yes my dear…sssnnnnnnnnnnnniiiiiiiiffffffff…quite pungent indeed…is that…dare I say…sssssssnniff…eggs I smell?..sniff sniff…hmmm…yes…quite so my darling…sniff…quite pungent eggs yes very much so …ssssssssssssssnnnnnnnnnnnnnnniiiiiiiffffff…ah yes…and also…a hint of…sniff…cheese…quite wet my dear…sniff…but of yes…this will do nicely…sniff…please my dear…another if you please…nice a big now…BBBBBBRRRRRRRAAAAAAAPPPPPPPFFFFFFFFLLLLLLLLLPPPPPPPPPFFFFFF Oh yes…very good!..very sloppy and wet my dear…hmmmmm…is that a drop of nugget I see on the rim?..hmmmm…let me…let me just have a little taste before the sniff my darling…hmmmmm…hmm…yes…that is a delicate bit of chocolate my dear…ah yes…let me guess…curry for dinner?..oh quite right I am…aren’t I?..ok…time for sniff…sssssnnnnnnniiiiiiiiffffffff…hmmm…hhhmmmmm I see…yes…yes indeed as well curry…hmmm…that fragrance is quite noticeable…yes…onion and garlic chutney I take it my dear?..hmmmmm…yes quite…BBBBBBRRRRRRRRPPPPPPFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFTTTTTTTTTTT Oh I was not expecting that…that little gust my dear….you caught me off guard…yes…so gentle it was though…hmmmm…let me taste this little one…just one small sniff……sniff…ah….ssssssnnnnnniiiiiffffffffffff…and yet…so strong…yes…the odor….sniff sniff…hmmm….is that….sniff….hmmm….I can almost taste it my dear……yes….just…sniff….a little whiff more if you please……ssssssnnnnnniiiiiffffffffff…ah yes I have it now….yes quite….hhhhmmmm…delectable my dear……quite exquisite yes……I dare say…sniff….the most pungent one yet my dear….ssssnnnnniiiifffffffffffffffffffffff….yes….
Use tor before they start filtering it. That’s usually what they block first. Submit from multiple IPs to make it harder to filter. Be realistic - there are websites that’ll help you generate fake names, addresses. You can even use ChatGPT to write time wasting comments. Try to avoid using real people’s names so you don’t get innocents harassed.
Worse: they think they got theirs but didn’t. The group most likely to experience homelessness? Boomers. The group most entering the workforce? People over 75 years old.
An entire generation worked so hard to put their vision of the world out there but couldn’t see that they were destroying their own future in the process.
Believe it or not, it used to be illegal in most places to be in public if you were maimed or deformed. We’re talking veterans will be arrested for walking down the street. The reason? Good christian folk suffer when they see it, it has to be kept out of sight.
This is a reference from a couple years back. Don’t recall where but a Muslim scholar made this argument. It’s bad to not have a beard just in case, apparently.
We held a hearing about whether or not the mayor should also be the Judge. The mayor has decided that the mayor runs the court impartially and there is no need for a 3rd party magistrate.
Totalitarianism - A system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state
Centralised government - centralized government (also united government) is one in which both executive and legislative power is concentrated centrally at the higher level
Communism - a theory or system of social organization in which all property is owned by the community and each person contributes and receives according to their ability and needs
I hate to be that person but I’d also say if I claimed to be a Christian that didn’t believe in God or Jesus it doesn’t mean Christians don’t believe in God or Jesus, it just means I’m not Christian.
I hate to break it to you, but capitalism in its purest form is very close to totalitarianism, it’s just that instead of a centralised government calling the shots it’s whoever has the fattest wallet.
I’m not sure if you realize this but using that term when it’s not really applicable looks silly. Using that term when it’s 100% not remotely applicable makes you look like a moron.
Incidentally, they might try to bullshit their way out of a direct answer by saying some misinformation about how “there is a five-year waiting period before a person can apply for pardon,” but just remind them that’s not how it worked for Michael Flynn and a whole bunch of other people under the last administration. Whether or not this gets done comes down solely to the President’s willingness to order it.
the early days of airbnb was basically this concept.
they didn't start out as a marketplace for unregulated hotels that destroy housing markets. that didn't happen until after they started cashing checks venture vulture capitalists.
So many people forget this origin. Air mattress in your spare room (in SF), iirc.
As much as I, personally, prefer a house when away - either with the family or as a couple - this is one of the drivers behind the crunch in housing. People can’t possibly afford to by a place to live when the competition is a wanna-be property “entrepreneur” who is going to get 2-4x market rent by doing short term rentals.
Originally my mum moved my brother and I into the same room and rented out the empty room for $40 a night. The cleaning fee was $20 and we still cleared $2,000 in one summer.
My brother and I each got a 5% cut and we bought ice creams from Safeway every day for a week until we got wicked stomach aches
I noticed another comment that mentioned he had been working for a few departments over the years, so probably he just did too much finally. Mean don’t get me wrong I’m happy an officer is being charged for crimes committed but I’m guessing there’re reasons he has a longer work history and probably shouldn’t have been hired multiple times in the past. Again this was off a comment so maybe the information isn’t accurate but when it’s so easy to believe is a pretty bad situation of police officers in general.
He had been hired by Sangamon county despite two charges of driving under the influence, the Springfield State Journal-Register reported, and had worked for other law enforcement agencies in Illinois for seven years before arriving in Springfield.
Most police in the modern day receive consequences.
Up until about 2010 it was almost never, with exceptional exceptions when something obscenely over the top happened. After that it was hit or miss, until 2020 happened and body cams were universal and ever since then it was pretty much decided. Since then it’s been pretty much all consequences all the time except in insanely Deep South departments that haven’t gotten up to speed with the times or something. And even then, usually some larger agency will step in, and consequences.
The rhetoric on the left hasn’t changed, and still assumes every cop is the enemy at all times and nobody gets any credit for the change in culture in policing to the point that the frontline police are probably the least of the problems in our still pretty overall unjust “justice” system, which kind of pisses me off tbh.
This is pretty out of touch as someone who sees new bodycam videos daily of cops violating people’s civil rights and who has had run ins with crooked cops. In places like Portland and Seattle, the police departments have been under federal consent decrees due to a pattern of violating constitutional rights. This isn’t relegated to the deep south and is actually quite common in the more “liberal” cities of the country (CO police have had numerous issues lately). We’re just a couple years out from George Floyd and things have barely changed.
someone who sees new bodycam videos daily of cops violating people's civil rights
That doesn’t mean anything though. You can find new body cam videos daily of cops bending over backwards to try to protect people’s rights. Neither of it means anything. It could be happening 1% of the time, or 50%, or 99%, and there would still be daily videos showing one or the other. The US is a big place; there are literally millions of new bodycam videos being produced every single day.
I actually don’t know what the number is - I have kind of my perception that it’s rare but that’s not based on too much hard data tbh. Do you know anything in terms of how quantitatively common it is?
Actually maybe a more basic question - can you send me a couple of these videos from this week? You and I may have different definitions of violating people’s civil rights.
and who has had run ins with crooked cops
I mean I am biased because in my area the cops are super professional; I’ve seen them in more than one heated dispute with someone and never seen them be anything but cool about it. But like I say I think the real question is how quantitatively common it is.
In places like Portland and Seattle, the police departments have been under federal consent decrees due to a pattern of violating constitutional rights.
Can you tell me more / link to a story? I would want to know more about it.
We're just a couple years out from George Floyd
4 years
The big shift that I saw was after 2020 with George Floyd and the other big instances that year and the massive shitstorm that ensued. Honestly, that stuff makes a difference. Without the protest I think things would have stayed more or less in the sometimes-yes-sometimes-no land.
But like I say that’s all just my anecdotal perception. I actually think it would be good to bring something quantifiable to it.
I’ve seen plenty where I thought I would beat some ass, and the cops are cool. You won’t find much of that because why would anyone post a routine police interaction?
Far be it for me to defend the pigs, I loathe them.
Sure, here’s one from Audit the Audit. I like that channel because it is more or less unique in taking neither the “pro police” or “anti police” viewpoint and just kind of taking things as they come and judging everyone involved in the interaction according to their behavior. Sometimes the cops are the good guys and sometimes they are the bad guys in it but it’s not like predisposed to one outcome or the other being always the answer, which it seems like is how almost every other person in the debate looks at it.
The problem with cops is similar to the problem we have with corporations/rich folk. Where corpos get to privatize gains and socialize losses, the policing establishment wants to systemically apply good PR/sentiment to the concept of cops while individually applying bad PR/sentiment to individuals(bad apples.)
It doesn’t really matter if some cops bend over backwards to help people when they turn around and circle the wagons every time one of them harms an innocent person, violates someone’s rights, beats their spouses, murders someone, robs someone via asset forfeiture, or commits a slough of other crimes.
The issue is the lack of accountability from their departments and the laws that make them immune from being held liable for their actions. The expression goes “a few bad apples spoil the bunch” and those apples have been rotting for decades. Imagine going into your job, shooting someone in the face because something like an acorn falling startled you, and all your boss does is send you on a two week paid vacation. How fucking insane is that?
I don’t think much has changed in the last 4 years. It seems people just dug their heels in about things. I will say there has been progress but it’s very slow.and incremental and only the most egregious cases like this are prosecuted when previously they would have been swept under the rug.
It doesn't really matter if some cops bend over backwards to help people when they turn around and circle the wagons every time one of them harms an innocent person, violates someone's rights, beats their spouses, murders someone, robs someone via asset forfeiture, or commits a slough of other crimes.
Dude
About 90% of stories I see in the modern day, with the OP article as a good example, involve the cops involved being brought up on charges
This is exactly what I'm saying: The culture has reformed significantly, and instead of saying "oh cool let's move on to the next thing which is an actual problem, of which there is no shortage", the reaction every time some cop does something wrong and is brought up on charges is "CONSEQUENCES wtf everyone knows cops are bullshit I bet they get off with" etc etc
Sounds like Portland PD is a bunch of shit. I may revise my assessment of the bullshit PDs across the country to include them (along with NYPD and LAPD yes) instead of just talking about the Deep South.
The Seattle one is a lot harder to make sense of; the links are broken. For example I was real into reading the article "Don't defund Seattle police without building the right bridges" but I cannot. I actually think I probably will agree with its assessment and that what it's saying is probably a perfect example of what I am talking about.
I've heard from people who are involved in some of these "replace the police with mental health professionals" programs, and they say it's working well. The people get better help, the mental health professionals get to intervene before it's a big violent crisis, and the cops aren't thrust into situations they're not trained for. The cops go along with the call when violence or weapons are involved, but the mental health people lead, and literally everyone wins.
That makes sense to me. It's progress. What doesn't make sense is DEFUND THE POLICE FUCK THE PIGS WE DON'T NEED YOU SHOOTING THIS GUY OH MY GAWD NOW HE STABBED ME HELP HELP HELP. And also starving the department of resources and making it a real shit-on-the-person unpopular job, so now they have trouble hiring people and have to kind of take what they can get in terms of hiring some not-ideal people.
Like you don't need to make somebody into an enemy if they're not. Police are there for a reason. You can't hire them to fulfill a needed societal function and then just shit on them all the time regardless of what they do because of some stereotype based on a big news story about the worst thing that any single policeman anywhere in the country did, back in 2020.
I know in your world every single cop is some dog-shooting civil forfeiture person, but that is not reality. I don't know how to explain it (especially if in your part of the country the PD actually is shitty, which it sounds like maybe is the case in the Northwest), but that's how I see it.
About 90% of stories I see in the modern day, with the OP article as a good example, involve the cops involved being brought up on charges
These are the egregious cases I talked about right here:
I will say there has been progress but it’s very slow.and incremental and only the most egregious cases like this are prosecuted
But police abuse happens all the time. It’s just not salacious enough for the national media to pick up the story for you to see.
The Seattle one is a lot harder to make sense of; the links are broken.
You can easily Google “Seattle police consent decree” if you’re interested in learning more. You brought up LAPD which us another perfect example as it has been reported that they have actual bonafide gangs operating within the department.
You have literally no idea how many of those were justified shootings versus not.
It could be 1,166 execution style slayings of an unarmed black person, or it could be 1,166 people charging at the cops with a machete where they tried everything in their power not to shoot the person.
You've seen bodycam footage of a cop shooting some woman in the face (and now has been charged for it). Great. I've seen bodycam footage of a woman pulling out a gun on a traffic stop and the cop reacting and shooting her, and then absolutely losing his shit with worry and relief because he was scared that he might have hit the people in the car behind her after having only a split second to react, after she left him with no choice but to shoot her when all he wanted to do was check what was up with her and why she was sitting unmoving in traffic.
The quantitative assessment matters. You can't just say that of course 1,166 of those were unjustified shootings, and so all cops are bad, and leave it there, just because that matches up with your self-referential structure for making sense of the world.
The rhetoric on the left hasn’t changed, and still assumes every cop is the enemy at all times and nobody gets any credit for the change in culture in policing to the point that the frontline police are probably the least of the problems in our still pretty overall unjust “justice” system, which kind of pisses me off tbh.
So after more than a century of abuse and coverups that will never see the light of day, decades of (predominantly) black entertainers and comedians ringing the bell on this over and over, and nothing being done, Rodney King not being enough of a wake up call to effect any meaningful change, and despite the fact that the problem is still not fully solved and that to this day people claim Chauvin should not have been convicted, you are upset that a few headlines about cops being prosecuted hasn’t completely turned the bus around on attitudes towards police yet in the four years since 2020?
How about when there isn’t a new story like this once every couple weeks for a few years? Maybe we can check then to see if it’s time for an attitude adjustment on “the left.” Because consequences are great, but if cops are still behaving like this it means that even they figure they will probably still get away with it.
Edited to add:
And when they stop having such non-existent standards for kicking someone out (or hiring them in the first place) maybe we’ll see some actual change. This is about the “good apples” refusing to toss out the bad ones. (and we all know what that does to the “good” ones)
He had been hired by Sangamon county despite two charges of driving under the influence, the Springfield State Journal-Register reported, and had worked for other law enforcement agencies in Illinois for seven years before arriving in Springfield.
Wonder why he left those other agencies? And I’m not even focusing on the 2x DUI.
you are upset that a few headlines about cops being prosecuted hasn't completely turned the bus around on attitudes towards police yet in the four years since 2020?
To solve the problems in this country, you need to be able to see what's going on clearly.
Back before about 2015, there was clearly a systemic problem of police violence against minorities in this country, and it wasn't taken seriously or identified as a problem by the media. There was a lot of white society that was waking up to it as a real thing that existed, but a lot that were not, and government and media were slow to even realize it existed. I think at the point, regardless of what the scope of the problem quantitatively was, most of what you were saying was accurate just because it was so important to get people to even recognize the problem.
Now, I think it's swung the other way. I think the stereotype that every single cop is the enemy is creating a lot more problems than it solves.
Underfunding departments leaving real crime unaddressed or leaving them to use substandard police because that's all they have in terms of manpower
People being pointlessly hostile to cops during normal interactions, to the point that the citizen is the one escalating everything and sometimes creating a serious issue for themselves when the cop is literally just trying to politely do their job
Attention being taken away from other aspects of the justice system that still badly need reform (imbalance of power between prosecutors and public defenders being a big one)
Making departments that are trying to take big steps to address the problem have a pretty justified reason to say "you know what fuck it, our funding got cut anyway and everyone I interact with all day just yells at me, so you know what, I'm gonna go back to slamming people on the ground when I arrest them because what's the difference"
I have zero indication that meaningful change has occurred aside from your assurance that it has and a handful of anecdotal headlines about cops being prosecuted.
Yeah, and that was why I was asking -- do you have any idea quantitatively? I have to say, I do not; probably my impression is based on a sort of anecdotal impression same as yours is. It would be good to look at something like, how many use-of-force complaints have there been, how many was bodycam footage made available for and what did things look like when reviewing the footage? Things like that.
Just basing things on a general anecdotal impression isn't a good thing to do on either side, I don't think.
Just basing things on a general anecdotal impression isn’t a good thing to do on either side, I don’t think.
Fair, but I remain unconvinced there has been meaningful change even as I acknowledge your point. We KNOW what the starting point was. If I’m to be convinced it has changed, I think the burden is on those (not necessarily/specifically you) who are telling me it has.
This and this are probably the best overviews I could find about what has and hasn't changed. It's a little frustrating though -- it's hard to find something substantial about "okay yes but what has the result been."
And, the things I could find about the result sometimes used very weird metrics (like lumping together all police shootings without making any effort to distinguish justified shootings from unjustified or attempting to determine what percentage were unjustified in order to point to whether that number is going down or not).
(like lumping together all police shootings without making any effort to distinguish justified shootings from unjustified or attempting to determine what percentage were unjustified in order to point to whether that number is going down or not).
I’m going to really frustrate you anyway because although I acknowledge that some shootings are justified, I also don’t trust how they are categorized since (to my knowledge) this categorization is determined by the content of the police reports themselves, and so would require me to believe that every false report was caught out and none slipped through.
Hm, that wasn't what I was talking about wanting to see. To me, what would be good to see would be a breakdown of, starting from the total number of shootings or use-of-force incidents in any given year:
How many the agency didn't release bodycam footage for
How many we got the bodycam footage and it looked justified
... it looked debatable
... it looked unjustified
That's a fuck of a lot of work, which is presumably why we don't see it. But that to me would be a good way to analyze whether things are actually working.
But that to me would be a good way to analyze whether things are actually working.
I agree, and to put my cynical hat on again, I think would be the job for the oversight teams that (to my knowledge) cops throw a tantrum about whenever they come up, and which I don’t think are widely implemented, or not effectively implemented in many cases.
Yet they never, ever fail to miss the banana I have in my carry-on for manual review. They very literally only look for the lowest-hanging fruit in scans. And that’s not a joke, they focus on the easiest to do and accept or reject.
The TSA is probably the only employer in America worse than Boeing when it comes to employees giving a shit about doing their jobs and actually doing them well.
Both organizations promote incompetent ass kissers over those who actually give a shit, and both orgs also have a massive culture of making up excuses for why something that was supposed to happen did not.
Oh right, both also have absurd amounts of paperwork that ‘ensures’ policy was followed, but seeing as everyone hates you if you actually try to keep up with it, most people just focus on a few main things and sign off on anything.
Every job I’ve ever worked, if someone asks ‘how did this happen?’, that is a question that has an actual answer within usually 30 seconds, maximum 30 minutes.
I basically agree with you, I’m phrasing it as if I were some kind of competent person asking where a whole bunch of taxpayer money is going.
There are times when it takes longer, such as when Fukushima had a meltdown. The thirty-second answer only starts to explain how it happened, the thirty-minute one makes you start to realize that a good part of it is because people fucked up, and the full answer, which requires going over reports since the construction of the plant shows you just how comprehensive the fuck-ups were and why it was only a matter of time for something that catastrophic to happen.
But yes, usually these things can be figured out pretty quickly. It doesn’t take nuclear science to figure out why they can’t do their job.
I totally agree with you that systemic failures require a systemic evaluation to figure out what actually happened. Most of the jobs I’ve worked have been as an analyst of one kind or another, so I of course know that many things do not have quick answers.
So yes technically I should have added some kind of qualifier, but you seem to get that I mean that common, routine job functions or system functions pretty much always should have fairly simple explanations as to why something routine happens or does not.
So, it takes me a while to do a root cause analysis of a quarter or years worth of one kind of failure in a complex process or another, but I very rarely have to manually investigate some specific totally unknown thing in person, as the system is (or should) be designed in such a way that tbis stuff is tracked and easily analyzed.
Contrast that with: Why isn’t the report released yet?
Oh, because a data set I need access to is offline right now, or some dumbass changed the access creds without informing me prior, I emailed them a week ago, and they have not responded.
I brought a 3-inch credit card blade (acquired at a trade show, with some tech company logo on it) through the airport four consecutive times without even realizing it.
I found it while packing for another trip, and I decided to gut my overly-thick wallet and realized that I’d been carrying it around everywhere, including through courtrooms and other government buildings that X-ray everything I bring every time I pass through as a contractor.
So yeah, a knife inside my wallet went through about 50 X-ray machines at federal facilities completely undetected, and I unknowingly carried it through all sorts of places where it is extremely illegal to have a knife. They always scolded me though if I tried to bring anything made of glass, like a coke bottle or something, because it could be used as a weapon.
I flew across country and back twice with a pack of super sharp Olfa snap off replacement blades that if forgotten were tucked into the bottom of my laptop bag.
I once lived and worked in a small store in rural Australia. When I left the job, I threw my box cutter in my backpack at the end of my shift without thinking.
They flew me back to the nearest city when I left, then from there I flew to Bali and back, then eventually I flew home. Every time I flew. I used that backpack as my carry on luggage. It was found when I landed after that final flight. I’d totally forgotten it was in there, and it had been scanned for all of those flights.
“In the fake news media, there are two sets of rules, and conservative[s] are always treated differently,” she continued.
Well, she’s right about that much, but not in the way she thinks.
Honestly, the fact that sociopathic whack jobs like Noem are even given the time of day by the media shows how beholden they are to conservative interests.
I fucking hate, and from the bottom of my heart, how Biden is funding the genocide in Palestine, but I’m still going to vote for him this time, because we just can’t have a person like Trump in the white house, period. I still can’t figure out how he got in the first time. I’d never let my 10 year old lead a country, yet we let Trump do it for four fucking years. I, too, am sick of this “the lesser of two evils” bullshit, but this time I’m giving it a pass because of Trump. We already have a crumbling country and can’t afford another four years of this dude.
I think Joe Biden is maybe the best president of my lifetime, and I’m going to vote for him with my head held high even though I live in a red state where it doesn’t matter at all. I wish things were simpler in the Levant, but I appreciate that Joe Biden is between a rock and a hard place with Israel. It’s not like he can just take Bibi out. He’s not Boeing. That said, even if I laid the entire genocide at Biden’s feet (which, while he’s not blameless, is absolutely not appropriate), he would still be head and shoulders an improvement over Donald Trump.
For that matter, I’d absolutely let my 12 year old run this country before I’d let Trump have a second term. My kid is brilliant, and more importantly, unlike Trump he listens to advice, can take no for an answer, and gives a shit about having a functional democracy four years from now.
A second Trump term is an existential threat to the nation. Hold your nose, hold your neighbor’s nose if you have to, but every able-bodied patriot owes it to their descendants and their patriotic ancestors to prevent a second Trump term.
I don’t understand why people point out that Biden is “funding the genocide in Palestine” and completely ignore and fail to mention that trump would do the exact same thing.
He has all but said he would cut Israel loose to do whatever they needed to finish the job.
The use of Israeli aggression is not a point of comparison when viewing the differences between trump and Biden.
Edit: and I apologize for the late edit - FWIW Biden has become critical of Israeli actions and offered some aid to Palestinians (Yeah, I absolutely agree it isn’t enough) while trump would prefer to wash his hands of the whole Palestine thing. That is a notable difference.
It isn’t the potential for denial that initiated my reply, it’s the fact that people declare US support of Israel is a strike against Biden when comparing Biden to trump as a reason to consider not voting for Biden. This is a false comparison and it is the point I am making.
I don’t understand why people point out that Biden is “funding the genocide in Palestine” and completely ignore and fail to mention that trump would do the exact same thing.
And hence why I won’t vote for Trump either. It’s not that hard to understand.
Ok. GFY for making the “if you vote for Biden you vote for genocide” argument while completely ignoring trump would do the same. You’re just a damn shill for the right wing. Useless MF.
lol, keep making stuff up about me, tankie. Keep throwing innuendos at me couched as reason so everyone can read your anti-Biden propaganda instead of what’s actually being discussed. Repeat it every single reply like a good little fascist.
E: quick trip through your post history says this is all you do, trash talk democrats and Biden, repeat genocide over and over while never a single mention of trump policy. Well, a quick stop in a porn community to jerk off for a break, right? How’s the propaganda job pay? Any good? Or do you just do it voluntarily out of pure hatred?
If voting for Biden is voting for genocide, then not voting or voting third party is voting for Trump, genocide and the destruction of democracy in the US.
The destruction of democracy in the United States has much deeper roots, and has been in-process for a long time. How long the effects have been visible is arguable, and the manifestation unpredictable, but fundamentally, a voting system which doesn’t allow people to express their actual preferences, well, isn’t representative of people’s actual preferences.
I can’t think of any more-profound way to state that truth at this early hour. A “democracy” which doesn’t reflect the will of the people is a democracy in name only, and we can only keep the “lesser-evil” streak going for so long before we’re so far into evil that we “have to” vote for a candidate materially supporting genocide so we don’t get the candidate who supports genocide without having non-actionable “concerns” about it.
“I still can’t figure out how he got in the first time”
Easy. He was propped up by democrats, namely Hillary Clinton.
If we reach a point 40 years from now when your choice is between a dem supporting 5 genocides and a republican supporting 10 genocides, are you still going to be militantly democrat and lash out at leftists who are sick of the whole thing?
Nope. I’ve stated this in multiple posts on other platforms, this is my last time going with this “lesser of two evils” bullshit. Because at some point, we HAVE to believe that it is intentional. I mean, what happened to “fool me once…”?
In this hypothetical we wouldn’t have the option to vote 40 years from now because dim bulbs allowed an insurrectionist to be elected. Donald will also accelerate climate fuckery so anyway we’ll be too busy squabbling over what meager food comes out of the remaining arable regions.
By not answering the question and participating in the process of this hypothetical choice the outcome is Israel is supported and Joe Biden loses the 2024 election.
So if a Trump presidency means the end of democracy in America, why hasn’t Trump been outlawed?
Why is Biden focusing on banning TikTok instead of truth social? Why weren’t the courts getting stacked 2 years ago? Why are the democrats’ obsession with “precedent” and “civility” taking more primacy than outlawing a candidate who, by their own admission, would mean the end of democracy?
By propping up Trump, the democrats have effortlessly oriented you such that you now give blind support to a genocidal regime. You’ve given the democrats a blank check. The democrats would rather lose to Trump and usher in fascism than shift left in the slightest way (halting genocide).
Also, epic reddit catchphrase my good sir. I tip my hat you, for you are a gentleman and a scholar.
Ten year old?! Thats a high bar for most republicans these days. They want knee jerk and whining. Thats something most 10 year olds are already figuring out doesnt get them what they want.
Biden is not funding Israel. The United States government is. Even if he wanted to stop the aid (he doesn’t), he doesn’t have the power to just ignore laws passed by Congress. Trump did that with Ukraine and got impeached for it.
I mean, he fundamentally does have the power to veto laws. There are potentially negative political consequences in doing so, but he certainly has that power.
Certain important people need to keep selling spyware, drugs, guns and war to keep themselves and their associates employed. As for whether the funds or the actual work (conflict) available is sustainable is for everyone including the accountants to consider.
The other problem is that war doesn’t really die, we just displace where we choose to fight, and how, if we imagine physical and cyber world peace for a moment, for the USA or China to reduce its military capacity by one third, or one tenth, we would see absolute chaos, thousands unemployed, the losses in maintenance and equipment, military supplies, medical, etc, nobody would win.
Any complex society where financial and other systems operate needs a minimum degree of social enforcement to maintain. Whether that can change like a function or is something that depends on a country’s GDP is another issue.
Just consider that humanity would either need lots of free time, energy and money or it would literally need to feel incredibly threatened by something on earth, which we all could not fight to control in order to actually fund going to space or even the moon, and I doubt a triple whammy of pandemic, food shortage or severe draught and floods could do it, it happened in the Bible and people literally just found more dumb reasons to do more dumb things, and no lowering mens testosterone or telling guys to shave more often wouldn’t do shit either. If people don’t find reasons to explore or learn, they find reasons to fight/play fight, it’s pretty normal, and if anyone remembers their childhood, usually it’s pretty much the same across generations.
Yes, Democrats allow way too much Republican nonsense to happen without challenging it. Maybe they assume citizens will realize how asinine it is but that isn’t working.
Every lie Republicans tell is repeated forever by Fox News and other right-wing outlets. Challenging them doesn’t undo the damage, but it does stifle them from making more talking points.
Calling them out also will not work. Modern republicanism hinges on Democrats being the enemy. It is a belief that lacks any specific evidence, but the idea has been repeated so many times through accusations with no evidence, predictions that never come to fruition, and outright lies that never get corrected that from the perspective of a Republican, even if some single allegation is proven false, they are hearing so many bad things about their countrymen that some of it has to be true.
The Russians perfected this type of propaganda and it is based on a couple quirks in how our brains work. First, even a wacky lie pushes your beliefs in the direction of the lie. Second, if a lie is repeated it is more likely to be believed. Wrap this up in a major media ecosystem that says over and over “You can’t trust other sources of information. Here are 10 reasons Democrats are pedophiles” and you have armed people storming into pizza shops searching for children locked in a basement that doesn’t exist.
The final quirk of our brains that sort of seals the deal is that direct contradictory evidence to a belief does not weaken the belief, it makes it stronger. The believer rationalizes a defense of the belief in light of the contradictory evidence. Changing someone’s beliefs requires an effort akin to cult deprogramming.
They should still fight against it. They just roll over whenever Republicans lie about vaccines, borders, transgender people, Ukraine, Israel. When there’s not even a dissenting “opinion” from our president it’s really easy to tell why only Republican trash is heard
The dissenting opinion is unlikely to be heard. Here is another brain quirk for you: we hate seeing information that contradicts our beliefs. The attention-optimized algorithms of social media have made it possible to spend a whole day consuming information without seeing anything we disagree with. Traditional journalism is no longer the source of shared truth for our society, we have surrendered that to the algorithms with the net effect of fracturing society into groups with very different ideas of what the truth is.
IMO the recent rise of far-right political power can be directly attributed to the “post-truth” bubbles we have found ourselves in. I know I have overused the brain quirk gimmick, but these bubbles are creating a huge amount of fear and uncertainty. This over-stimulation of our amygdala reduces empathy and causes us to further constrict our in-groups. This makes it easier for power hungry politicians to push out-groups into “enemy” territory and leverage the fear of the enemy into raw political power.
I do acknowledge the irony, as I type this message, that I will be heard only by people that share my values. My hope is that you the reader see that empathy is the cure, and choose not to close off your in-group despite the feeds and the mod bans and the powerful men profiting from this mess.
I basically only have empathy left. I’m just trying to think of a way to help people I know that isn’t “stop watching propaganda.” Like I can’t think of something to convince my mother in law that the earth is more than 6000 years old because she thinks the English translation of the Bible is the greatest evidence of anything so y’know. It’s those lies that people so easily believe that if just explain where the lie came from it’s easy. But the bible is kinda a paradox in that, and I’m not risking that conversation because I don’t have money for my own place yet
I dont think it matters what Dems do in response to Republican antics like this. All any Republican is looking for is a quick 10 sec clip they can play on loop that makes them look good or Dems look bad. Media has become so fragmented that people disagree on basic facts. It wouldnt matter what a Dem said or did, it will never pierce the right wing media bubble.
What they can do is cut off all oxygen. No one action is going to fix it, but they need to be deplatformed starting at the top and working downward, cut off funding anywhere possible: fix citizens united, don’t debate them without having control of the microphone, etc
Not all Democrats, but most seem to simply be Republican Lite these days. They might be a little more socially progressive, but most don't seem to mind the Republican shenanigans
Republicans have to be continually humiliated in front of the nation. That is the only thing that will work, and that is all that they will listen to (other than outright brutality). Utter and complete humiliation every day.
Dems as a party won’t do it because they a) fear losing imaginary “centrist” voters, and b) don’t actually want to be in power anyway, since they can fundraise more when they are in the opposition.
My company has an interesting strategy. We’re mainly hiring people local to our office (closed the others), but no one is required to go in. Hell, I’ve been told a few times, “You ordered $thing and no one was there to receive it. Can you check from now on?”
This way, if we want to pull a team together for a minute, we can. Most folks know each other, if even from a brief visit, and that works out better. Lemmy bags on in-person relationships, psychology be damned. 🤷🏻♂️
But if we ever mandated a return to the office? LOL no. Our top talent would walk and we’d be left with the dregs who can’t find a better job.
Our top talent would walk and we’d be left with the dregs who can’t find a better job.
Yuuuuuuup. This is exactly what’s happening at my job right now, after they mandated at least three in-office days per week. Only the top people are leaving, too; the chaff and the bums love it, because they no longer have to produce, rather they just have to be seen.
That’s sounds like a great model. I’ve been working remotely for about a decade. One of the reasons is because I can tap into a larger job market than if I stuck to just local companies.
While I would love to have a job where I could meet up in person with coworkers for the day, there are just so many more opportunities with remote companies.
You really found a great sweet spot between remote and in-person!
My job was in person until the pandemic hit. I was sure I’d hate remote working, but it turns out that I love it and I’m way more productive than I was in the office. (No coworkers stopping by to chat for one thing.) My job has now moved to the parent company which is about 10 hours away from me so I now permanently work from home. No expectation that I ever come into the office. (There’s no way I’d do that commute!)
A few times, I was unsure of my job’s future stability and looked around. Being a web developer shifting technologies while at 48 can feel really unstable. You’re too old for many people. You don’t have deep experience with specific technologies. It’s frightening to think that I could age out of my job two decades before retirement.
My local job market isn’t great, but work from home means that I can look nationwide (or further if I want) if need be. It gives me a lot more options and doesn’t mean I have to uproot my family and travel halfway around the country just to have a job. (Something that I couldn’t do for various reasons.)
My job was in person until the pandemic hit. I was sure I’d hate remote working, but it turns out that I love it and I’m way more productive than I was in the office. (No coworkers stopping by to chat for one thing.) My job has now moved to the parent company which is about 10 hours away from me so I now permanently work from home. No expectation that I ever come into the office. (There’s no way I’d do that commute!)
A few times, I was unsure of my job’s future stability and looked around. Being a web developer shifting technologies while at 48 can feel really unstable. You’re too old for many people. You don’t have deep experience with specific technologies. It’s frightening to think that I could age out of my job two decades before retirement.
My local job market isn’t great, but work from home means that I can look nationwide (or further if I want) if need be. It gives me a lot more options and doesn’t mean I have to uproot my family and travel halfway around the country just to have a job. (Something that I couldn’t do for various reasons.)
I want it to be true but I also see the world. In my line of work in my country (science and not exactly commercial) the consensus seems to be “remote work was a disaster, let’s not” up to explicitly forbidding remote/hybrid seminars.
I just started a gig at a company that doesn’t really know how to do remote work well, but that basically told me that they were having trouble finding candidates so they had to start looking for remote.
I recently left a gig that sold their offices off so even employees in the area don’t have an office to go to anymore and everyone is remote. They’ve lost some Product/Manager people over the decision, but have otherwise seen an uptick in productivity and morale.
I just recently got laid off, and the industry I work in doesn't have a huge presence in my city so I was pretty bummed. I was expecting a long, difficult hunt for a new job (I have zero interest in moving).
But boom, first job I applied for, I got. It's located in the next province over, but it's full remote. Cost of living is way cheaper here so I got a big raise and my new employers are probably still chuckling about how cheap I am. A win for everyone.
Only if enough companies offer fair remote work. If 90% of them stick to work from office culture war, what are you going to do? Not work? I can quit my job and have a new one by the end of the day. I would still struggle to find remote work in a reasonable time frame. I’m not willing to blow my savings on it so I stick with job O enjoy that offers hybrid.
I’m ok with the current status quote. The problem with fully remote work is there’s always someone cheaper, whether by skill, experience, desperation, or cost of living. It will be another race to the bottom, like the first few decades of outsourcing, and high cost of living cities would be hardest hit
Because I’m partly remote and have to be located near an office, I still get the pay structure of where that office is. I still enjoy my Boston area high cost of living pay. If we were fully remote, would they really pay that? What happens to high cost of living cities, much less any city? While I like to think I have excellent skills that are worth the extra pay, there’s no way I can claim to be worth, say two similar guys in Austin, or four in Alabama. There’s no way I can live where i do if I were paid like a lower cost of living area …. And that’s before you even consider the rest of the world.
This is what I don’t hear discussed as often as I’d expected. When you make a solid case for 100% remote, bargaining power is lost - or at least the COLA is harder to defend.
Because everyone on Reddit thinks they’re hot shit. Locally in the county I might be the best available candidate, but nationally? There could be a thousand like me. And if you open the flood gates to other countries… The race to the bottom no longer ends at minimum wage.
It depends. Full remote means that companies could recruit nationwide, but that cuts both ways. There’s a few hiccups in having employees in multiple states that opens a company up to employment rules in many states, so some companies may want to avoid certain states until they are big enough to handle the complexity. It also means every company has to compete for employees with all the other big companies, not just whoever is within about 50 miles of them.
Maybe. Going international is another big step in bureaucracy for a company. Time zones also become a problem, you can’t really have a team made of people farther than about 4 timezones, you need separate teams at that point, which adds complexity. Language barriers also start to become an issue as you expand, even English speaking countries have vast differences, and English as a second language adds more difficulty.
I think it also depends on your amount of experience and if you have a unique skillset. If you have truly rare skills that a company needs, it’s hard for them to not give into your demands.
Also, with the older style managers and CEOs retiring, dying off, etc, I think remote work will continue being more common than you’d expect.
With that said, it always helps to have some bargaining power.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.