PhilipTheBucket

It's not "harassment" to disagree, even disagree in a pointed fashion.

Like if someone came onto lemmy.world and made a joke about how bad the moderation is, that's not "harassment." That's just them speaking their mind. In any reasonable space that kind of thing is allowed. I know that on lemmy.ml, it is sometimes not. Maybe in this case it is not? I don't know. Maybe it is, let's see.

I'm well aware that lemmy.ml as a community doesn't tolerate being spoken to in such a disobedient fashion or criticized. I think that's silly. My comment was sincerely not badly intended, just more along the lines of "wake up you guys are being ridiculous" (both about the screaming intoleration of anyone in American politics who seems like they might be poised to make some kind of progress, and also now about the defensive hivemind behavior that gets all bent out of shape about anyone who disagrees with the herd about that or various other issues).

Up to you man. It was meant as a one-off comment, but of course in standard lemmy.ml fashion now we have to have a big conversation about it where you continue to comment hostility to try to discourage anyone from speaking their mind about that kind of thing in the future. The purpose is to silence dissent. I probably won't really go back and forth about it (what even would be the point?), but that's my intent in making these comments. If I was trying to harass I would probably come to .ml more often, but I don't, I only found this one because it was a crosspost.

2035: In other news, the newly reanimated body of Karl Marx has been elected to the Virginia House of Representatives

Lemmy.ml: Until he's willing to CLEARLY AND UNAMBIGUOUSLY call it a "genocide" and STRONGLY indicate support for trans rights he's STILL FUCKING DEAD TO ME I'm voting for Jill Stein

What the fuck

How did I manage not to know this

Okay, TIL I guess, my bad

I remember when HL Mencken wrote an obituary for William Jennings Bryan that was so scathing in its honesty that it's still talked about a hundred years later. Interestingly enough that was during a time when politics was doing the kind of great revolutionary things that American government was actually supposed to be doing, which it currently is not.

Telling the truth about matters of public importance even when it hurts somebody's feelings used to be a core value in this country. I get that she's friendly with the family. If she wanted to just say some brief words of condolence it's fine. But taking extra time to shine him up and pretend his time entrusted with the power generated by the people was spent on anything other than killing motherfuckers and stealing money is a massive disservice to this country.

When you're entrusted with that public sword, you're supposed to do something good with it. Pretty much everyone who voted for Kamala knows Cheney was one of the chief villains of the modern era, and doesn't mind saying so, and is going to think it's bizarre and crooked that she's out here lying about his record to try to pretend he was a decent person.

Why did they put such tremendous effort and then give all the crabs 8 legs though...

The crab video is really marvelous. I love the absolute clear frustration of the crab "ARGH NO DON'T TURN ME UPSIDE DOWN I HAVE EGGS TO LOOK AFTER YOU MORON"

Yes, but they're taking home six and in some cases seven figures[1]. And at the end of the day, isn't that what's really important?

[1] pretty much all of which is provided by Google as a sinecure to make sure that Chrome keeps being not a monopoly

"We got 7 Lex Luthors and no Superman"

You don’t need the conversation to proceed entirely on your terms - you want it to.

I'm not the one who dipped from it as soon as I got something that wasn't entirely on my terms.

I'm done talking about this lol

He didn't. Some of his allies did, but he was a lot more circumspect about it.

https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/watch-trump-waffle-on-releasing-epstein-files-in-fox-news-interview-last-year/

I mean I have no real problem with paywalls, the people who run the thing have to pay their people somehow else the whole landscape will just be propaganda that someone is willing to subsidize. But at the same time I won't say that archive.is is some kind of awful malicious horrible-man.

"You just don't accuse a PASTOR of SEX ABUSE Jesus Christ Marissa I better never hear of this again, I mean EVER."

He's already been proved in court to have committed rape, and very credibly accused of having raped a 13-year-old.

I'm not saying that what's in the files is not even worse. But what's already in the public record is already enough and then some.

Deeply conservative areas are often up to some depraved shit behind closed doors, because the culture of the place means that you're not supposed to say anything about them and so they fester and get weirder.

Deeply liberal areas are also often up to some depraved shit, it's not like it's a panacea, but there is at least some kind of societal check in place. In these little backwaters there is generally none. See also Ruby Franke.

I really would be happy to. I need them to answer my question first, though, in order to make the point that I want to make. Instead they evaporated, which means I don't owe them continuation of the conversation with the blank void they've left in their absence.

Young people are going to push the boundaries, whatever the structure or wherever the boundaries are defined. It's built in to people for a reason. It is part of how things don't get stagnant and decay.

You can get alarmed by young people's porn addictions and the total collapse of physical social society, and then look for a solution to that, but that's hard and these people are lazy and so this is what we get instead.