FEMA ‘not ready’ for hurricane season: document
'We will abandon you if war continues,' Trump tells Israel - report
US President Donald Trump has been increasing pressure on Israel over recent days, an anonymous source told The Washington Post on Monday.
"Trump has been letting Israel know 'we will abandon you if you do not end this war,'" the source added, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the press.
The increase in pressure from Trump came after Israel called up tens of thousands of reservists and ramped up Gaza bombings, the Washington Post added.
like this
originalucifer and Maeve like this.
You mean the guy who said he supported relocating Gazans and building a resort?
Man this propaganda cycle is getting weird.
like this
dcpDarkMatter and Maeve like this.
and building a resort?
trump needs personally bought off and everytime someone does he thinks every prior bribe suddenly wasn't enough.
He's 100% looking at what he just got in bribes from other ME countries and re-evaluating what his support of Israel should be worth.
Israel might have had blackmail on him, but he's at the stage where nothing can really change anyone's minds. If it comes out there's a tape of 20 9 years old peeing on him while he wears an Obama mask; they'll claim he just cured racism or some shit.
Hell, there's a good chance less support if Israel was some of the strings of his recent bribes even.
like this
Maeve likes this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
Israel might have had blackmail on him, but he's at the stage where nothing can really change anyone's minds. If it comes out there's a tape of 20 9 years old peeing on him while he wears an Obama mask; they'll claim he just cured racism or some shit.
He'd blame it on Biden.
comes out there’s a tape of 20 9 years old peeing on him while he wears an Obama mask;
The Russians had that over him in 2016. Between then and now, AI videos have been invented and Trump was convicted of a crime without any negative effects. Blackmail doesn't work on him anymore, just bribery.
You should never trust anything coming out of Trump's mouth and only look at his actions. Actually, that counts for all politicians.
In this case, what is remarkable is that Trump did not visit Israel during his Middle East tour, which is basically unheard of for an American president.
like this
Maeve likes this.
did not visit Israel during his Middle East tour
lol arabs winked more and wagged more money
like this
Maeve likes this.
like this
dcpDarkMatter and Maeve like this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
Chump is still jonesing for that Nobel that he hasn't gotten (that Obama does have).
That's sticking in his craw in a way most of us just can't understand. 🤷♂️ 🤡
like this
Maeve likes this.
I fucking hate Trump as much as the next anti-fascist, but the “I can shoot a man on 5th Avenue and get away with it” factor here is kind of amazing. No Democrat or Republican not named Trump would be able to spurn Israel like this and get away with it. The pro-Israel and evangelical lobbies would fucking destroy anyone else.
For the record, I still think he’s an absolute garbage human and absolute garbage president, but damn.
like this
celeste likes this.
Sure Chump's pissed...
Netan-yayhoo and Putain are standing in the way of that Nobel that Chump doesn't have (that Obama does have). 😂 🤣
Gotta hurt for one such as Chump... 🤷♂️ 🤡
I actually think that in Israel's case, threats are the only option left. The world has been trying far too much subtle diplomacy with them.
This is what Biden could have done. Threaten to cut off all aid until the genocide stops. The option was always there.
It's very much a stopped clock scenario of course. Trump is being the same bull headed idiot he always is, this just happens to be the one time that's appropriate.
And it won't matter because he'll fold like a cheap suit. He's all bark, no bite.
Trump and Putin hold phone call but Kremlin refuses Ukraine ceasefire
Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump have held a rare phone call, which the US leader described as “excellent,” but the Kremlin refused to agree to a ceasefire in the war with Ukraine, despite pressure from Washington and European allies.
Speaking to reporters in Sochi after the two-hour conversation on Monday, Putin described the call as “very meaningful and frank,” and said he was prepared to work with Ukraine on drafting a memorandum for future peace talks.
However, the Russian leader declined to support the US-proposed 30-day unconditional ceasefire, which Ukraine had already agreed to – and which Washington had framed as the call’s primary objective.
Trump and Putin hold phone call but Kremlin refuses Ukraine ceasefire
Trump describes call as ‘excellent,’ despite Putin’s lack of support for ceasefire that US said was primary objectivePjotr Sauer (The Guardian)
like this
KaRunChiy, Lasslinthar, felixthecat, wagesj45 and dandi8 like this.
like this
frustrated_phagocytosis and wagesj45 like this.
The other bloke also said he won't invade in another phone call so...
With this one we can at least be fairly certain he tells the truth.
like this
frustrated_phagocytosis likes this.
Putin is a very samart man. He said that i'm handsome and strong. Can you believe how smart he is? He once fought a bear with only a povket kife and he said i was probably stonger than him.
What about the war?
What war?
Trump: "Zelensky, you need us so that we can make sure Putin takes more land."
Zelensky: "You're right. I have such great respect for you, Mr. President."
Tell that Putin puppet Trump that he's a weak ass bitch Zelensky, else you look like one.
Is anyone surprised
I'm assuming that phone call was basically the same energy as Adam & Joe asking Dermott O'Leary to get shit from a service station
Except with zero concession
He ceaded everything to Putin at the get go and now is surprised he won't compromise.
What was the title of that book again?
like this
wagesj45 likes this.
he was prepared to work with Ukraine on drafting a memorandum for future peace talks.
Talks for drafting a memo regarding talks for drafting a plan for talks regarding a setting for talks regarding a plan for peace talks somewhere down the road...
Putain has zero intention of ending this without the full and complete subjugation of Ukraine.
🤷♂️ 🤡 🖕
Putain has zero intention of ending this without the full and complete subjugation of Ukraine.
Even if Russia subjugated the entirety of Ukraine, they still couldn't afford to stop. They've completely transitioned to a war time economy and have isolated all foreign capital.
If Putin decides to end the campaign in Ukraine, it would just mean that they're about to invade somewhere like Slovenia. They're economy couldn't handle the transition into a regular economy without imploding.
like this
wagesj45 likes this.
A federal judge had blocked the administration’s plan to remove the temporary protected status of more than 300,000 immigrants.
Deal with EU will make food cheaper and add £9bn to UK economy, says No 10
Deal with EU will make food cheaper and add £9bn to UK economy, says No 10
Agreement reached to ‘slash red tape’ on food products, in exchange for extended EU access to fishing watersJessica Elgot (The Guardian)
It would be pretty great wouldn't it?
No. It would be the opposite of great.
I don't expect it any time soon.
While public opinion seems slightly in favor it's far from a done deal. Also I don't think the EU would make the same concessions the UK enjoyed in the past, which would make negotiations longer and harder.
There are a lot of requirements to be able to join the EU, and many of them are deal breakers for the UK that they never implemented - like having to switch to the Euro and joining Schengen. They would undoubtedly demand to get the same special exceptions they had before, and require every EU country to unanimously agree to give them, which almost certainly would never happen.
And even before that, one of the requirements is a "significant, stable and long-lasting majority public opinion in favour of rejoining". One interpretation of this was requiring a few years of at least 65% public approval for the join.
Anyways it's nice to see the 2 sides having some constructive results, now that the insanity of the conservatives is out for a while.
Switching to the Euro was never a requirement for EU membership, though.
As I understand it, adopting the Euro is now a requirement for joining the EU but there are no deadlines for the adoption. I believe Poland at least is obligated to adopt the Euro (but they haven't and show no signs of doing so).
It wasn't. It is now.
It was one of the special exceptions that the UK had, gained in 1992 when the Maastricht Treaty was negotiated.
Who can join and when?
All EU Member States, except Denmark, are required to adopt the euro and join the euro area. To do this they must meet certain conditions known as 'convergence criteria'.Economy and Finance
Specifically they got an opt-out for those specific parts.
Supreme Court allows Trump to revoke protected status for thousands of Venezuelans
Supreme Court allows Trump to revoke protected status for thousands of Venezuelans
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday gave the Trump administration the green light to revoke special legal protections for thousands of Venezuelan immigrants.Lawrence Hurley (NBC News)
like this
Australis13 likes this.
It was "truly shocking" that the Supreme Court authorized the move without giving the case more consideration, he added.
no, it wasn't.
like this
Shawdow194 likes this.
Trump World Is Slamming the Door on Elon Musk: ‘People Hate Him’
Trump World Is Slamming the Door on Elon Musk: ‘People Hate Him’
Republicans—including the president—have stopped talking about the Tesla CEO’s work at the Department of Government Efficiency.Janna Brancolini (The Daily Beast)
like this
Oofnik, Lasslinthar, IAmLamp and dandi8 like this.
like this
frustrated_phagocytosis likes this.
He was in Saudia Arabia with the president so he's still there. Don't let that fucker off the hook.
Will never happen but if the dems don't go fucking scorched earth should they ever have power again we'll never stand a chance.
like this
wildncrazyguy138, frustrated_phagocytosis, slothbear and felixthecat like this.
I appreciate the fervor, democratic leadership is a bunch of spinless cowards, but trying to tear down democrats without a competent actually progressive replacement political organization is handing power directly to Republicans to rule completely unopposed.
Given the reality of political parties in the US, I'd rather spinless corpses filling up space to slow Republicans down rather than letting Republicans take total control in the absence of any marginal opposition.
Unless you're planning on running for office as a competently progressive candidate.
like this
frustrated_phagocytosis and slothbear like this.
like this
frustrated_phagocytosis likes this.
Sure, let's say they are controlled opposition. What do we do after we burn down the democratic party? What then? Because I do not like the prospect of what comes after a single party takes complete control.
There is a lot of talk about burning and destroying but nothing about what comes after and it's the "What comes after" that has me most worried.
So you’re saying that democrats should seize power and then use that power to politically persecute republicans?
How does this end exactly?
like this
OfCourseNot, rash and slothbear like this.
IMO the plan would be a complete rewrite of the political system. It's clear that the current system is based purely on the honorsystem, and needs to be redone in a way that rewards multiple parties, with actual consequenses for the capitalowners whenever they commit a crime.
A revolution doesn't have to end in just one ruling party or idealogy. It also doesn't have to end with killing all republicans. The denazifying of Germany didn't mean everyone who had supported the nazi party had to be killed. A lot of ressources were focused on reeducation instead, and so far, it seems to have worked really well. The hardliners who directly helped the fascists will obviously have to be punished for treason against the country's democratic foundation, but that doesn't mean everyone who voted for Trump has to be punished. Most people are just ignorant, brainwashed and scared, because they've been pumped full with disinformation for the last 50 years.
But the absolutely most important part of all this, is to remove the system that rewards corrupt politicians. If a politician is openly corrupt, openly works to undermine their voters' interests, they're still more likely to get reelected than be replaced, because the party decides who gets to run, and the voting options are so few, and when people are brainwashed like they are, they'd rather vote against their own interest, than vote for their percieved enemy. So how do you get rid of that?
1. Remove the overwhelming power from media that spreads disinformation by forcibly shutting it down, prosecuting the people in charge and the owners.
2. Reward multiple parties by reworking how many votes you need to be voted in, and drastically expanding representation. There are 100 senators. Norway has 169 elected officials in their "Stortinget" for their 5.52 million people. That's 32662 people pr official compared to the USA's 3,401,000 people pr senator. How this will work, I don't know, but I'm sure we can find some welleducated political scientists who can figure out a way.
3. Fund smaller parties and set up debates that focus on inviting these smaller parties to give them a platform. In order to get funded and invited, you need a certain amount of signatures from potential voters. I'm not sure about the exact amount of signatures, but for the sake of arguement, let's say half the amount of votes you'd need to get elected. This way smaller parties are guarenteed a platform to reach the voters.
I'm not going to write a whole manifesto here, so I'm going to stop here, but my point is, that this can absolutely end without rounding up anyone who doesn't agree, and it can be fixed, but it needs a complete overhaul of the incredibly broken system in the USA, and it absolutely also needs hard punishment for the people who directly aided in the rise of fascism.
The answer is a grassroots movement to vote for independents and candidates that explicitly do not take corpo money.
Look at the Republican Party, it is an unrecognizable entity these days, remade in the image of Trump and taken over entirely by MAGA. But at first the party rejected him pretty strongly. And MAGA is just the Tea Party with a mustache and a Jesus piece. All he had to do was convince people to vote for him, and once in power he applied pressure to all his opponents to get them to fold.
Dems need to realize that they do not need mountains of cash to win elections. Trump ran circles around Kamala with less money. He beat Clinton with about half the money. He took over a party that rejected him in his first go. If progressives wanna know how to remake the Democratic Party they really need to study how Trump moved and take the same risks he did. And of course you also need someone with charisma, which I don’t think they have right now.
I don’t think you’re being honest but just in case, let me help you. The implication is, this country has a fascist rot that needs to be excised before it kills us all.
Once the fascist party pretending to be conservative gets out of the way, the conservative party pretending to be liberal can take its place.
Then we might actually have a shot at a true progressive movement in this country.
Fascism is incompatible with democracy.
I’m being honest. I just don’t understand how you would make the distinction because they are all republicans. What about tankies, where would they fit in these? They are leftist but fascists all the same imo. Would Christians be killed as well? What about Muslims which have even more restrictive views on civil rights?
Where do you draw the line between who is defined as a fascist or isn’t I guess is the question, and how would you be able to tell them apart from a regular conservative?
Logistically this ends with everyone who identifies as republican getting killed. It’s the same situation with Trump and immigrants, he wants them all out but he can’t get them all out with due process because it’s impossible to do so, so the only way to get what he wants is to break every law in the process and send them to foreign gulags.
Either we believe in the democratic process or not. And let’s be clear, the democratic process means that if a majority votes for a tyrant, then democracy is working as intended. Using violence to avert such a result is inherently anti democratic. You can argue that it is the morally correct thing, which is arguably true, but we must also suspend the pretense that you believe in true democracy.
It’s also the kind of rhetoric that has given Trump the fuel to convince the masses that there’s a “radical left” plotting to destroy the country. Because this sort of idea does end with the destruction of the country and it is not clear to me that it ends in a liberal democracy and not in an illiberal democracy or a dictatorship of some kind.
This is at best a deeply naive take.
Either we believe in the democratic process or not. And let’s be clear, the democratic process means that if a majority votes for a tyrant, then democracy is working as intended. Using violence to avert such a result is inherently anti democratic.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parado…
Bottom line: democracy has limits when it comes to groups that would dismantle democracy, even if they are voted in, because if elected, no one would ever have a voice again. Likewise, a free and fair society must be intolerant of intolerance.
I don’t think that free, fair society is necessarily equivalent with democracy. Democracy is simply the rule of the majority, and the majority can certainly choose to live in a society that is unfair and free except for a few. In fact that is mostly how democracy has operated for most of it’s history. You can also impose a free , fair society from the top down but it would require the ever elusive Philosopher King.
I’m just saying that if you’re willing to strike first against a political faction in what is still a free and democratic country, you’re better off not pretending that democracy is your North Star. Maybe it’s equality, or freedom, or fairness or any other ideal. But whatever the ideal is if you are willing to overturn violently what has been decided peacefully through elections, then you’re not a true believer of democracy.
I'm not the person you were originally replying to, but I think laws should be put in place to prevent extremist parties from being put on the ballot at all. Germany has the right idea.
But failing that, if a democratically-elected government comes to power and then proceeds to dismantle democracy, then it is in the most literal sense a tyrannical government, and tyrants must be overthrown by any means necessary.
I agree. It is a good mechanism to have though I worry that it can be abused.
This is why I always end up going to a more libertarian view of things. When there are rules, especially rules that are quite literally designed to be weapons, then there is a big risk for abuse. That’s why state sovereignty for me is such an important component of avoiding the bullshit Trump is (unsuccessfully I might add) trying to pull off. If the states are strong, then no tyrant can really fuck with them. Of course this also runs the risk of tyranny forming within a state, but in that case I think there are mechanisms to combat it, like the other states could embargo it etc.
My hope is that dems can recognize this and become the party of state sovereignty, though I think that ship has sailed for both parties.
This all sounds like MAGA wishful thinking toward Democrats. I have NEVER heard a Dem call for the deaths of all Republicans, but I have heard Republicans call for the elimination of all Liberals MANY times.
MAGA, as a political entity needs to be abolished. It is a treasonous terrorist hate group, and should be prohibited. It's leaders should be prosecuted for crimes they have committed or facilitated, and anyone who was involved in promoting, planning, launching, or participating in the Jan 6 Insurrection should be prohibited from ever holding office .
Nobody is calling for the elimination of the Republican party, just for it to return to being a responsible party who cares about America, instead of being a tool of the Sociopathic Oligarchs. If you are hearing that Dems are calling for the murder and elimination of all Republicans and their party, then you are just hearing bullshit from the Conservative Propaganda Machine. No such suggestion has been made, nor would it ever be discussed.
Frankly I’ve seen the same rhetoric from both MAGAtards and Progressives. Look:
This all sounds like Democrat wishful thinking toward Republicans. I have NEVER heard a Republican call for the deaths of all Democrats, but I have heard Democrats call for the elimination of all Conservatives MANY times.
The Democratic Party, as a political entity needs to be abolished. It is a treasonous terrorist hate group, and should be prohibited. Its leaders should be prosecuted for crimes they have committed or facilitated, and anyone who was involved in promoting, planning, launching, or participating in the 2020 BLM riots should be prohibited from ever holding office.
Nobody is calling for the elimination of the Democratic party, just for it to return to being a responsible party who cares about America, instead of being a tool of WEF and George Soros. If you are hearing that Republicans are calling for the murder and elimination of all Democrats and their party, then you are just hearing bullshit from the Liberal Propaganda Machine. No such suggestion has been made, nor would it ever be discussed.
Spend like 10 minutes in r/conservative or r/askconservatives and you’ll see a few posts that sound exactly like that. Exactly like that. I don’t wanna bring up horshoe theory because it’s not exactly true but godamn do both sides work hard to make it look like it is.
inb4 are you implying we need to roll over
No. Not at all. But I also don’t think that saying that once dems are in power they need to go scorched earth and persecute political opponents. This just continues the ever escalation of political division until killing each other becomes the only viable option because you will clearly not be able to coexist in society.
That's your problem. You spend your time immersed in the lies of the Conservative Propaganda Machine, and can't figure out why the rest of the world doesn't see it your way. All you can do is try to get your opponents immersed in the Conservative Propaganda Machine, and hopefully they will start seeing it your way.
Get away from Conservative sources, and find out what the rest of the world is saying without the treasonous Conservative spin.
So they are not stating a fact when they say there liberals that have called for violence against conservatives but you are being factual when you say that conservatives have called for violence against liberals.
I’ve seen both sides call for violence against one another so I can say that you are both being factual but whatever. It’s clear you suffer from the same affliction as them. I’m not going to engage in this pointless debate any longer.
I just hope both factions one day can either reason with one another, or at the very least de-escalate things.
Will never happen but if the dems don’t go fucking scorched earth
They only know how to punch left.
Simply not talking about him is not "slamming the door"...
They've simply learned that hyping Elonazi was invoking too much damage to his companies.
So now the Department of Gratifying Elonazi (DOGE) minions will more quietly work behind the scenes and we will learn much less about the damage they're doing and when they're doing it.
This is much worse.
That's because Elon is a little bitch.
So is Trump, but Trump hurts the brown people and gay people and trans people and the libs so they have to keep liking him.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
People hate nazis in general
If only. Entirely too many scratched-liberals in the NATO block. And that goes straight back to its founding.
The story of the Nazi general who ended up becoming head of NATO
World War I veteran, Nazi army chief of operations, secret CIA agent, and chairman of the NATO military committee.Ronald Ángel (El Ciudadano, Noticias de Chile y Latinoamérica para el Mundo)
American Journal Editor Releasing a Headline That Does Not Contain the Word "Slam"
Difficulty: IMPOSSIBLE
Massachusetts is considering a special tax on large global corporations. If they are unhappy, they can get out. Local companies will take their market share.
Critical mass forming behind tax hike on “megacorporations”
A majority of lawmakers in both the House and in the Senate are now backing legislation that supporters say could bring in an additional $400 million in annual revenue for the state by raising a tax on some “megacorporations.”Colin A. Young (WWLP)
California Governor Gavin Newsom demands cities force homeless people to move every 72 hours
On May 12, California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, demanded that cities throughout the state adopt anti-camping ordinances that would effectively ban public homelessness by requiring unhoused individuals to relocate every 72 hours.While presented as a humanitarian effort to reduce homelessness, the new policy victimizes California’s growing unhoused population—approximately 187,000 people—by tying funding in Proposition 1 to local laws banning sleeping or camping on public land.
In his announcement, Newsom pushed local governments to adopt the draconian ordinances “without delay.”
California Governor Gavin Newsom demands cities force homeless people to move every 72 hours
The attacks are a continuation of the longstanding assault on California’s vulnerable homeless population, spearheaded by the Democratic Party.World Socialist Web Site
like this
aramis87, frustrated_phagocytosis, Pamasich and Drusas like this.
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness and subignition like this.
bit by bit
That sounds like "a little" and "slowly"...
Pretty sure Newsom's swing to the right is pretty fair complete by now. He's basically full MAGAt, just managing to keep it somewhat low-key so far.
🤡 🖕
I'm still fuzzy on his reason though... Could be looking for a Presidential run in the near future...??? 🤔
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness and subignition like this.
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
He's gearing up for a presidential run, and I'm mostly sure that the DNC wants him for 2028; he's running hard to the right (not that he was ever really far left to start with, FOX made him sound way cooler than he ever was) so that they can try the "run a moderate Republican and see if we can win by peeling off a whole 6 republicans nationally and then shaming the tuned out base when we lose" strategy against Trump for a third time. There for a bit, I would have been pretty okay with voting for Gavin, but it's clear enough to me now as a CA resident that he's the clown prince of shitlibs and he's just desperately scrambling to try and pick up support from DOZENS of moderate republicans all over the country.
About the only thing he's done lately that I agree with is dedicating $1B/yr of California's carbon cap and trade program to CAHSR for the next fifty (I think it was fifty) years, which solves a HUGE problem that's been a big source of delays for CAHSR, which is the lack of predictable funding.
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
IMHO, there is a fair amount of misinformation floating around this issue.
Newsom hasn’t been pushing to blindly kick people off the street with no where to go. The draft ordinance is about filling unfilled shelter beds.
So if you had 200 beds and 1000 unhoused people, Newsom wants to be able to clear enough encampments to get 200 people into shelters. Cities wouldn’t clear all the encampments, only enough to get close to filling the available beds.
And that said, that policy doesn’t really account for the fact that shelters can be pretty dangerous and worse than the streets. So although this policy sounds compassionate, it’s actually quite flawed.
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
So although this policy sounds compassionate, it’s actually quite flawed
That's an understatement the size of "Trump's tariffs might not make eggs cheaper"..
shelters can be pretty dangerous and worse than the streets
That's troubling. What's the solution here?
IMO, we should start by focusing the conversation on this issue so we can start to collect and socialize ideas.
That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if we needed some sort of way to rigorously audit and report about shelter conditions. That way we could at least have policies that don’t blindly assume every bed is equal or safe.
Yeah. I'm torn.
On one hand, I've seen what happens when homeless people, especially the worst of them, take over a public space without supervision. It is not hyperbole to say they destroy the area. The massive homeless camps in downtown Denver featured needles, excrement, unwashed clothing, and, in two instances I personally witnessed, a fire that tore through the area, destroying the homeless camp and risking damage to everything around. I get that we need to do better on housing all around and support the various proposals (such as homeless communities, repurposing abandoned buildings, etc), but there has to be an element of enforcement, including disallowing camping in areas not specifically purposed for camping, ensuring that people move on, and forced relocations, if for no other purpose than to address buildups of trash and vermin (to be clear: rats, not the people, I'm not calling homeless vermin 🙄 ). And IMO, a key component of this is funding a public healthcare program that addresses mental illness, such as Proposition 1 in California. This is good because addressing mental illness can lead to reduced drug abuse, which is a major cause of homelessness.
But on the other, what Newsom is doing is using tricks right out of the Trump playbook by demanding that cities and counties adopt policies they do not wish to implement to share in the funding that would make homelessness go down. I also notice that there are no requirements for carrots, only sticks. I.E. no demand that supervised camping sites be set up, or empty buildings bought up and repurposed as housing. Just the requirement that you're unwelcome in public places if you're unhoused, and that the law will be brought against you if you dare persist in the same place for 4 days in a row, no matter how much you take care of that space. Seems like he's working to appeal to the Right? "See, I can be as heartless and cruel as any Republican!" Makes me less inclined to vote for him.
like this
wildncrazyguy138 and Drusas like this.
like this
Pebble_Clef and subignition like this.
This is one of those comforting lies people tell themselves. It's the just world fallacy.
Drug use and homelessness are mostly orthogonal issues, but people latch onto it as a quick and easy way to dismiss providing housing for the homeless. People of all income levels have mental illnesses and drug use issues. But for the homeless, we decide that their drug use issues are such a moral failing that it's OK to deny them housing as punishment.
Also, people confuse cause and effect. Being homeless causes mental health and drug abuse, not the other way around.
like this
mattw3496 likes this.
Maybe I miscommunicated my position. I'm not interested in withholding housing or support from anyone. As a previous recipient of such services, I will always advocate their value. I think we should be doing more, not less. I simply think the value of housing and mental health services is multiplied exponentially when they are combined.
Being homeless causes mental health and drug abuse, not the other way around.
You're saying this with authority as if it's some sort of universal truth when it is not. Speaking from experience having been homeless myself (2 years between Seattle and LA), both are true. Many people end up homeless because of how their mental illness has affected their ability to go about daily life. For these individuals specifically, housing alone is not a cure-all. If that person doesn't receive some other kind of support, their life is still unmanageable for them.
To treat the general problem of homelessness, both types of people in this binary have to be considered.
like this
Drusas likes this.
Many of those people don’t start out as drug user or being mentally unwell, that’s what you get in a system where you are not safe in shelters, building for homeless people means adding spikes to benches and now you will be driven from the location that is now closest to “home” like some lepers being run out of town.
Housing and the cost of it is definitely a big part of the problem.
Housing and the cost of it is definitely a big part of the problem.
They did a large study of homelessness in California that ended a year or two ago and it concluded that it was mostly the price of housing.
Inside the scandals and abuse pushing CA homeless out of shelters - CalMatters
A hidden epidemic of death lurks in California's homeless shelters, where violence and unhealthy conditions drive people back on the streets.Lauren Hepler (CalMatters)
I definitely get what you're saying here, but I think you've overblown what you see as the issue.
Housing is DEFINITELY the issue itself. Many homeless people get started on the path to mental and drug abuse issues when that paycheque doesn't go far enough to pay the bills. Student Loans. Car Notes. Rent. Food. All get more and more expensive, making it harder to be a productive member of society, and meanwhile, pay stays criminally low. Until you watch as your landlord kicks you out, with a few dollars to your name and hundreds or even thousands of dollars of bills screaming for those few bills, and watch as everything you ever owned gets thrown out on the lawn and then stolen because you can't protect any of it, and then some shadowy figure offers you a hit of the good stuff to make you just forget the fact that society considers you a failure, you can't know how hard it is to deal with this situation unless you have a tiny bit of empathy.
I'm not saying we should tolerate this. I'm saying that we need to address the real root causes: costs are so high while pay is so low, and get people into housing again, with the understanding that drugging up and being a 'free spirit' on the back of somebody else's labour isn't an option. But saying housing isn't an issue shows you don't actually understand the problem. Please rethink that.
I agree with you. That's why I pointed out that the only mandate was enforcement, aka, the stick, and no incentives, aka carrots, were required. If Newsom was serious about tackling this, the enforcement would be paired with incentives, and the cities would be getting help to set up alternatives to camping in public places, such as the supervised camping we use here in my neck of the woods.
But let's be clear. You still need the stick. It's perfectly OK to say "We'll do everything we can to get you off the streets, but you need to put in the effort yourself, and no, trashing public spaces is not an option."
...showing your prejudice...
Yeah. You got me. I'm prejudiced against the idea that people can do what they want, without consequence. How heartless of me, eh? Make it difficult for me to remain civil to you, why don't you?
Here's the difference between you, AnalogNotDigital, and me: You both have staked out opposite but equally extremist ends. Let me reduce your position to its core principles.
People should be allowed to do what they want, when they want, without any consequence for their actions.
No. No, a thousand times no. I am not going to sit by and let people walk over me, because I've already dealt enough with people walking over me. I have to get up and do my 9 to 5 every weekday, and moderate my drug and alcohol use to a level that I can function in my job, to keep a roof over my head and food on the table. In no world will "in my opinion we should do literally nothing about them being there" be a valid option to tent cities with rampant drug and alcohol use.
To make this more stark, you engage in the same duplicitous and dishonest debate tactics the Right uses. Because of course if I want accountability for people, I must want homeless people starving in the streets. Let me make this clear for you. I want housing to be available to everyone. Said so multiple times, in fact, in this thread alone. But that housing needs to be contingent on people getting clean and becoming productive members of society to the extent their clean selves can be. I do not support any demand that unhoused people be swept in order to partake of Proposition 1 funding. That's what I expressed in my second paragraph. I guess you skipped that in your rush to attack me for my first paragraph.
News flash, pal. I stand by what I said in that first paragraph. You do not have a right to society subsidising your drug and alcohol habit. You DO have a right to housing, but that right has a responsibility of putting your labour in for society. Your access to transitional housing should be contingent on you getting clean if you have a drug or alcohol problem. It should be clear that the alternative you are proposing, living a drugged, drunk life in a vermin-filled tent on public space, is not an option. If you put the effort in, we give you the carrot of subsidised housing to allow you to get back on your feet and make your way into the workforce. If you decide that's too much effort, then the stick comes out until you rethink your bad decision and go after the carrot. That's been my position all along, and I don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth and bald-faced lying (no homelessness in the 19th century?! History lessons for you). No solution is complete without both the carrot and the stick, because people are jerks and will take advantage of you the first chance they get. There are jerks who are looking to take advantage of homeless people with the Stick Only approach. Then there are gullible fools who will be taken advantage of by some homeless people because they want the Carrot Only approach. I'm advocating for both because I want to minimise being taken advantage here, and you're accusing me of being ... prejudiced and making bald-faced lies that only need a tiny bit of research.
So, in the spirit of launching personal attacks, I see your prejudiced accusation and call you both naive and an asshole. Good day, sir.
I watched what I assume was a meth lab burn the underpass of a major bridge near my apartment in 2023. Then just a couple weeks ago, only a few days away from the two-year anniversary, it happened again.
We need to support people. Otherwise, we will vilify them. The sad fact is, this is a result of decades of destruction, and there doesn’t seem to be any willpower to do the hard thing anymore.
It’s enough to make you want to walk into the ocean.
The other issue that you forgot to mention is a lot of red states take their homeless people and send them to California.
I live in LA. I've been threatened by people who are homeless. Multiple times. Yes, these people deserve help. But there's a billion reasons why our current system isn't working and part of that is the state can't institutionalize these people to get them clean from drugs and to help start them on the pathway to being a productive citizen again.
I live in the Miracle Mile area, and I do not give a shit about someones 'right' to camp on the sidewalk with a huge ass tent that smells of shit. Sorry, but that's a public health hazard.
Do I want people to get help? Absolutely. Do I think that people who live in these areas also deserve to live in a safe and clean environment? Absolutely.
Something has to be done, at least Gavin is trying things.
Something has to be done, at least Gavin is trying things.
This is fascist thinking - the cult of action for the sake of action. You can't identify any real solution to the problem, but by God, you want SOMETHING done. And that something, when undefined, inevitably just means, "send law enforcement to torture them until they kill themselves."
Do you not know what fascism is? The cult of action is one of the hallmarks of Fascism:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fasci…
"The cult of action for action's sake", which dictates that action is of value in itself and should be taken without intellectual reflection. This, says Eco, is connected with anti-intellectualism and irrationalism, and often manifests in attacks on modern culture and science.
This policy has all the marks of the cult of action. It does nothing to actually solve the homelessness issue. It focuses on using cruel brute force to punish the undesirable members of society. It's a performative action not meant to actually achieve any noble end, but simply to show that the regime is "doing something."
How is this actually helping anyone? What good actually comes from spending millions in public resources to endlessly shuffle homeless people from one location to another?
The state is using performative violence simply as a propaganda tool to make citizens think the government is "doing something." That is the cult of action for action's sake. It's literally one of the textbook characteristics of fascism.
This isn't hyperbole. We're talking fascism 101 here. California is sending in the jack boots to terrorize the undesiables. How is that not fascism?
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Banning homeless encampments is not fascism 101.
Let's look at the series of events:
- California severely restricts the supply of housing to benefit the wealthy. Existing homeowners and corporate landlords get rich as the price of housing soars, as the state actively restricts people from building enough to keep up with the need.
- Homelessness rates soar. Millions find that the market value of their labor is now exceeded by the market value of rent. They become homeless through no fault of their own.
- Instead of providing adequate services to the homeless, the state responds by demonizing the homeless. Homeless people are stereotyped. Any crime committed by a homeless person is shouted about from the rooftops. A hate campaign is enacted to portray the homeless as violent, drug-addicted, and insane. The homeless use drugs at a lower rate than the housed, but public opinion believes the opposite. Their disheveled state is portrayed as a deep character flaw rather than simply an inevitable consequence of their material reality. People are made homeless through no fault of their own. But the public is convinced through a vast propaganda campaign that the homeless deserve to be homeless and are fundamentally evil people.
- The state unleashes a campaign of performative terror on the homeless population. Police disband camps and force people out, without providing anywhere for these people to go. It is simply action for action's sake. Newsom can proudly state, "I didn't solve homelessness, but I sure made their lives a living hell by forcing them to endlessly move from place to place! The dirty hobos deserve it!"
That's textbook fascism. Newsom doesn't have a solution to this problem. Solutions do exist, but they would require building enough housing to drive down its cost. And that would hurt the bank accounts of rich people. So instead, Newsom has unleashed a state terror campaign against California's homeless population. The goal of this terror campaign isn't to solve homelessness or to help anyone in any manner. It is meant to show middle class and wealthy people that Newsom is making those "dirty homeless people" pay for their sins. Well off folks are tired of seeing the homeless that they created in public view. So Newsom is promising to use state terror to drive them out of the public sphere entirely.
If you think this isn't fascism, well...you need to learn what fascism actually is.
Except that's not what WoodScientist said. He didn't say that wanting to end dangerous homeless encampments is fascist. He said that doing something just for the sake of doing something without careful thought is a key aspect of fascist thinking. "Act first and fuck the thinking" is how Fascists work, attacking rationality and denying thought in order to suppress their followers ability to see through the lies Fascism clinks to. Fascist thinking doesn't mean you're a fascist, though. It just means that you're prone to accept Fascism if you continue to think like a fascist, and at a minimum, you're going to make a bad decision.
Again. I don't disagree with the notion of "no, we're not going to let you live on the streets and harass your neighbours." I do think that it should be paired with things like expanding housing in all forms and making it easier for people to get on their feet, however. And I don't think a strong-arm tactic of denying the funding for those positive things to compel communities to adopt your hard ball tactics is something I want to see somebody on my side doing. Those are Trump tactics. Leave them to Trump.
Where you going to build affordable housing in west LA?
There's literally no place for it. Should people living in Venice just be given beachfront housing for free to live in?
Whats your SOLUTION to the problem? Because like I said. There are multiple reasons there's a homeless epidemic across the entire country.
Okay, do you want the lecture, or the tl;Dr?
Tl;Dr: bulldoze every single family home and put up commie blocks with commercial spaces on the bottom floor.
Lecture edition: it doesn't have to be that extreme, and we can do it without bulldozing homes with pretty simple and cheap zoning reforms. Bonus: we can also stop our cities from being constantly bankrupt, fix traffic, protect the environment, and make our cities stop sucking. Here's the lecture, in case you're interested:
youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJp…
Strong Towns
Videos on the topics of StrongTowns.org, mostly about the financial viability of cities, and insolvent cities of America and Canada.YouTube
Honestly I wish we had the balls to turn LA into New York West Coast Edition. I'm right by the Wilshire line being built, and I cannot wait to be able to take public transit from my place to LAX to Grand Central in NYC.
Thanks for giving a real answer and not jingoistic slactivism nonsense you see so many people spouting on here. ❤
I'll take a look at that video later when I have more time on my hands.
For sure! I just hate that so many people have strong opinions on this shit then do nothing, don't educate themselves on the problems at hand, and then acknowledge that people on the 'other side' of an issue have actual concerns that do need addressed.
I'd fucking love it if we had our homeless problem under control, and I firmly do believe we would if all the fucking red states would stop bussing THEIR problems here.
I've been in LA for 9 years and I've seen the changes that are taking place. Bike lanes are rampant on the west side, and they're starting to come to places like Weho and others as well which is awesome. We're expanding our subway lines, and things slowly are getting better. I wish we would take a big TVA style initiative, and make some dense public housing districts that were affordable, but that's a HUGE endeavor.
I'd love to get involved with local stuff like that, but I'm currently in a new job, and don't have much free time right now. =(
He's also giving more funding to services that help the homeless so they can get back on their feet and get a home, right?
... Right?
these out of control homeless encampments are a major and visible talking point that Republicans used to define democratic leadership. The policy of trying to avoid confrontation and hope something happens has marked some of the best cities in the world as no-go zones that are portrayed as Progressive and liberal leadership failures.
I understand why he’s chosen to do something.
We know how to fix homelessness. It's not bulldozers; you fucking house them. Newsome has made some good strides in terms of encouraging more housing in California, but we'd be much closer to actually addressing homelessness if:
- He hit the bullshit zoning laws that restrict housing in this state with as big of a hammer as he hits homeless people with, and
- We stopped trickling money to the homeless via an infinitely recursing filter of non-profits and either directly administered the aid via the state government or just gave them the fucking money / housing. In LA, there's something like 10,000 non-profits focused on homelessness that have to coordinate with each other. That's some looney toons level shit right there, and it should be obvious to anyone that that would never work.
California's been trying to fix homelessness with cops and bulldozers for forty or fifty years, and especially the last twenty. How long do we have to keep "accidentally" killing people and setting taxpayer cash on fire before we acknowledge that it doesn't fucking work and never will? You cannot beat homeless people into being housed, though I can see why Gavin would think that this solution would appeal to potential Republican voters who will ultimately not vote for him anyway.
like this
subignition likes this.
I understand why he’s chosen to do something.
You're falling for fascist propaganda. Notice, Newsom isn't actually doing anything to fix the problem. He's not providing these people housing at all. All he's doing is sending out law enforcement to endlessly harass the homeless. That's what his "doing something" actually is. He's sending the police to "deal with" the homeless.
You recognize there's a problem. But you can't identify a solution. A fascist strongman comes along and promises to "do something," without any real plans or promises, just the vague cult of action for the sake of action. Newsom tortures some poor people, and you walk away feeling good, believing that at last someone is "doing something."
This won't actually house anyone. People don't disappear simply because you kicked them out of their camping spot. All you really do every time you disburse the homeless is make it that much harder for them to escape homelessness at all. Every time a camp is torn down, people lose invaluable possessions, resources, and documents that are really their only hope of ever pulling themselves out of homelessness. Newsom's actions are only exacerbating the homelessness crisis.
It's the poorest of the poor that will pay the price for Newsom's fascist propaganda campaign. But, at least you get to feel good knowing that he's "doing something." You must be a big fan of the TSA.
like this
mattw3496 likes this.
Progress has always been an unachieveable ideologically pure outcome for both Democrats and Republicans
Not eating that propaganda that we can't do better and demand better from our leaders
like this
mattw3496 likes this.
Do you know what fascism is? I am not saying that Newsom is exhibiting fascist behavior as some cheap and quick pejorative. I'm not using fascism as a synonym for "bad" here. I'm pointing out that this kind of policy literally is the textbook definition of fascism.
This is fascism 101. Among Umberto Eco's 14 common features of fascism is the cult of action for action's sake.
The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”
Your response would make sense if I was complaining that the police disbanding camps simply wasn't going to enough good. But this action doesn't help anyone. It doesn't reduce homelessness at all. In fact, it actually makes homelessness worse. Every time camps are torn down, people lose possessions and documents they need to escape homelessness. If you bulldoze a homeless camp, you're sending a fair number of personal and ID documents to the landfill. Every time you clear a camp, you're making it that much harder for people to actually get back on their feet.
This isn't the perfect being the enemy of the good. This is simply an unambiguously harmful policy that does no good at all for the community.
Why is this action fascist? It meets several of Eco's points. From the linked list numbers:
(3) Cult of action for action's sake. It is purely performative. It will actually increase the number of unhoused people, as the more unstable someone's situation, the harder it is to return to housing. It's an objectively negative policy, but people support it because Newsom is "doing something." This meets Eco's point 3, the cult of action.
(6) Appeal to social frustration. People are tired of seeing the homeless and being reminded of their own precarious state. Better sweep them out of view.
(10) Contempt for the weak. Pretty obvious. These people have simply been priced out of the housing market. But Newsom vilifies these people and treats them like animals.
(12) Machismo and weaponry. Better send in the SWAT team to tear down some tents.
This is quite literally textbook fascism. I'm not condemning camp sweeps because they fail to meet some ideological purity test. I'm condemning them because they're completely unproductive and are a textbook definition of fascist policy.
Umberto Eco's List of the 14 Common Features of Fascism
Creative Commons image by Rob Bogaerts, via the National Archives in Holland One of the key questions facing both journalists and loyal oppositions these days is how do we stay honest as euphemisms and trivializations take over the discourse?OC (Openculture.com)
Does anyone have a source for the 72 hour thing?
I don’t see it in the draft ordinance.
gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/…
The draft ordinance basically says that, if there are available beds, a city can clear a campsite if they give people 48 hours notice and direct people to the available shelter beds.
Although, this ordinance does not address the fact that many shelters cause more harm than good. People are on the street because it’s safer for their wellbeing and belongings. No one seems to be talking about this.
like this
Drusas likes this.
like this
mattw3496 likes this.
Spending millions a day to shuffle around people instead of actually saving money by putting them in unoccupied homes.
Can't wait until the DNC picks him for me tells me this was actually a good thing, like platforming Charlie Kirk and Steve Banon, and saying trans people are actually disgusting with them.
Fascist.
I live in downtown Oakland. It’s grim. The city has been fencing off areas where people previously had tents. It’s very sad.
like this
mattw3496 likes this.
The real problem is Citizens United, which held that money is speech. As long as that ruling holds, we will be ruled by the ones with the most money.
And right now, that group is the TechBros who ran the right software at the right time in 2011 and are now sitting on a stash of crypto worth billions....
I would argue it's the same country and the same people. Capitalism was the guiding principle then it is the same now.
Why else would you not have universal suffrage, don't banish slavery, not conduct genocide, other than to concentrate power in hands of few while continuing exploitation of everyone.
How can giving voting rights to only land owning elites be for the 'betterment of all'? How is disenfranchising the majority for the 'betterment of all'? Even if we don't count the slaves, how is not giving voting rights to women and poor for the 'betterment of all''? How is it any different from what is happening today, where people's voting rights are being taken away other than the reasons? It was people wouldn't know what's better for them, now it is fake votes.
One could argue that as a fledgeling country early politicians did need the support of the rich slave owners. But it didn't take 76 years to build the country. Secondly how it is different than politicians doing the dirty work for the corporate for their election today?
There is no way one could spin up a fantasy where genocide of indigenous people was for the 'betterment of all'.
Please don't misunderstand I never meant you were supporting genocide. What I meant was the framers had in their mind genocide when the constitution was made.
George Washington was a prospector and his motivation, in part if not whole, was the British restriction against surveying and annexing Indian lands.
Voters want Dems to stand up to Trump, not self-flagellate
Voters want Dems to stand up to Trump, not self-flagellate
Sorry, Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson.Noah Berlatsky (Public Notice)
like this
frustrated_phagocytosis, aramis87, Pebble_Clef, wildncrazyguy138, SuiXi3D, Drusas, Lasslinthar, Oofnik, subignition and Australis13 like this.
Kinda like the world wants Americans to do. But alas, they aren’t and don’t seem likely to.
Edit: and everyone just makes excuses and flagellates. Other countries protests over divesting from Israel or retirement age dwarf your reaction to fucking fascism, authoritarianism, and hate. Half a million in one European country show how complicit the country of “freedom” is.
Go fuck yourselves. Your problems are greater than the excuses you slap back at the world you are fucking over with greed and apathy.
You are culture of juvenile greed and hate.
As someone in the US, I kind of hate comments like this. Not because I don't agree with you; I'd love for us to stand up to Trump, too, but the problem is, I don't know how to (effectively) do that, I don't think many others do, either, and whenever this comes up and I ask the question, 'What exactly do you want us to do?', the answer is always non-specific and weak, like "Protest!", which, I mean... cool? We have been, but it's not accomplishing much of anything. Really, I think the answer is 'We don't know, either', and everyone else is equally as frustrated as we are and, like us, don't have a better way to express it than calling for nonspecific action.
All that said, in keeping with tradition, I'll ask you: What exactly do you want us to do?
like this
dcpDarkMatter, Pheta and subignition like this.
Thank you this sums up pretty accurately how I’ve felt lately too.
Like, we’re effectively a collection of pseudo-countries loosely tied together by a federal delegation spread across a contiguous landmass roughly a third the size of the continent of Asia. Our cross-border infrastructure is a joke, worker protections are nonexistent and to drive several hours/days to the nation’s capitol to protest (which we’re being told does and doesn’t work??) is a level of cost many literally cannot afford.
In a lot of states we do see grassroots efforts to fight back and improve. That is a better comparison to smaller European countries that have won in fighting against government corruptions, imo. Even Texas recently had a small wave of progressive wins in local races.
Unfortunately I think a lot of outsiders see “you have guns there!” and as such want us to start an all-out bloodbath. I don’t think it’s wrong for the average citizen to not want to die unnecessarily, and/or only use arms for literal self defense rather than reckless political violence. (inb4 “bUt Ur gubbermint is aLrEadY violent!1! DoN’t WaIt!2!” yeah no duh, see “literal self defense”)
A good chunk of the 20th and 21st century European revolutions people point to when we ask were largely nonviolent. That’s what we’ve been trying too. Not unarmed, but nonviolent (also corporate property damage doesn’t count as violence).
Malcolm X, the Black Panthers and of course MLK are solid figurehead examples of American protest that led to some level of success. Protesters during the AIDs crisis too. But it took them years. We’re trying.
like this
dcpDarkMatter and subignition like this.
Another thing to think about here is that it's only been about 4 months of this dipshit being in charge.
They are comparing what is happening now to other episodes of revolution or cultural rebellion that took (sometimes) decades to foment enough unrest to cause change.
People are doing things, and we're pissed. But like, what can a person living in LA effectively do? We have blue reps in a blue state that is suing the government multiple times over multiple grievances.
Short of going out and getting kinetic there's not much for people to 'do' yet.
I plan on getting more involved in politics.
Dems already did that. They ARE the impotent half of American politics. They're as in-there as can be. It was more than a mere plan for them.
Then what? WHAT HAPPENS NEXT with your absolutely democratic lack of actual ability to do anything within the bounds of the system you have sworn to uphold? #SayWhatAgain
I’ve now come to the belief that enough t supporters need to be negatively impacted and start voicing their concerns and start taking action - not voting for far right, maybe doing another insurrection against t this time. Nothing will change in the us as long as the r citizens continue to support this regime.
I live in a very red area and there are flags everywhere. But I’ve seen several houses take theirs down. There will be hope when having a flag up means something else. Until then there isn’t much we can do besides help our people/local community.
With that said, the d’s need to have their own project 2028 to actualize, and I don’t think they do because the party needs to be revamped. The geriatric unit needs to retire. The r’s and d’s have more in common than we acknowledge.
If only there were some unique way in which Americans were better prepared than most populations to deal with quickly resisting and overthrowing a tyrannical government.
Oh well.
like this
dcpDarkMatter and Pheta like this.
It's a comment made by a person who lives in a country where in living memory a small spark of resistance led to the eventual defeat of the most powerful empire on Earth.
"Almost impossible".
Sorry guys we didn't want fascism but the alternative was just, like, hard.
Hey why haven't ypu fixed all the problems in your country yet?
We're all waiting on you, lazy ass redditor.
like this
dcpDarkMatter and subignition like this.
like this
themadcodger likes this.
We want to stand up to Trump's stock manipulation: but Nacy Pelosi keeps blocking bills making congressional insider trading illegal.
We want to stand up to Trump's support for multiple genocidal dictators, but Chuck Schumer keeps pushing for more weapons to Israel.
We want to make majauana legal, but Kamala Harris keeps touting how she had sent majauana users to jail.
In short, we want democratic leaders who stand for democratic values or at least who don't actively push policies counter to them.
like this
subignition likes this.
Dems and Republicans want the same thing. A kleptocracy.
Why would Dems stand up to anyone writing their bonus checks?
The problem with that idea is that the Dems have been about the status quo for so long that it's literally why Trump won. People aren't voting Dems because they went the "don't rock the boat" route for so long.
The Dems need a reform.
Look, you need shock value to turn heads these days. That's why the manosphere succeeded the way it has. That's why the fascists in power got the support they got. It's all about speaking at a level that the people can relate to.
If you want to stick to Victorian norms of grammar and etiquette, you get nowhere.
Besides, foul language isn't a sure sign of stupidity:
sciencealert.com/swearing-is-a…
Swearing Is Actually a Sign of More Intelligence - Not Less - Say Scientists : ScienceAlert
The use of obscene or taboo language - or swearing, as it’s more commonly known - is often seen as a sign that the speaker lacks vocabulary, cannot express themselves in a less offensive way, or even lacks intelligence.Bec Crew (ScienceAlert)
DNC: "Best we can do is approving of Trump's horrid cabinet picks, voting for internet censorship, and abandoning queer people because trans people are icky."
I'd be way more enthusiastic to vote and donate and advocate if Dems weren't just shooting the democracy they claim to protect in the foot and then handing Republicans the gun to keep it bleeding.
I want them to actually fight Trump. Or follow on the promises of arresting him from 2021 to now. Or enact policies that don't make people consider fascism because they're desperate and fed propaganda.
But that would cost money and anger the donators who back Trump and them, so controlled opposition it is!
Yeah, this article is completely omitting, why Biden and Harris lost. It is not addressing that the current party elites are the same party elites like before the election. Biden and Harris life on politically in the DNC.
But it continues to simmer; data analyst Lakshya Jain argues that “Democrats are on the verge of a Tea Party-style, intra-party revolt.” He also identifies the anger as directed at Trump, not Biden.“The numbers suggest that the fury is at least partly fueled by the Democratic base’s dissatisfaction with congressional leadership’s relatively conciliatory approach to Trump this time around, and their inability to stop him,” Jain writes.
It is the same "revolt" that was tried to prevent the party from loosing catastrophically to Trump by being a pro genocide pro wall-street party. It is the embracing of "bipartisanship" and peddling to "moderate Republicans" like Dick mass murder Cheney that is now voting alongside the Trump administration and rightfully despised. It is the same liars that kept pretending Biden was at his mental faculties when everyone could see videos of him wandering around blitzed out of his mind and gaslighting everyone who said Biden needs to drop out as "secret Trump supporters".
There will be no improvement without acknowledging what went wrong, who is responsible and most importantly tossing the responsible people out and letting a new generation take hold, one that does believe genocide, war crimes and capitalism sucking the blood out of everyone are indeed wrong and need to end.
Can we just hit the baseline and have Democrats NOT vote against their party's interest?
Maybe I'm just cherry picking but policies in the past decade passed by a Democrat has been like 90% Democrats/ 0% Republicans approve.
But policies passed by a Republican is like 100% Republican / 20% Democrats approved.
Attack of the Sadistic Zombies | The GOP budget is incredibly cruel — and that’s the point
Congess could stop it of course. It would only take a few Republicans deciding to listen to constituents.
Americans: I recommend calling your congressmember today and asking that they vote against the current budget bill. The Capitol switchboard is 202-224-3121
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness, Lasslinthar, Australis13 and Dantpool like this.
Commandos in women's clothing: New details on IDF’s covert operation in Khan Younis
According to accounts gathered by Safa News Agency, a white bus arrived on Mars Street in the Al-Mahatta neighborhood early Monday morning, appearing to carry displaced women and their belongings.
Witnesses said nine individuals dressed in women's clothing — some veiled, others with exposed faces — exited the bus and stormed Sarhan’s home, shooting him dead and arresting his wife and children.
Palestinian media reported that over 30 Israeli airstrikes were launched over a 40-minute span to secure the special forces' extraction. Helicopters and tanks provided additional firepower, reportedly killing and wounding dozens.
Commandos in women's clothing: New details on IDF’s covert operation in Khan Younis
Special forces kill senior Gaza terrorist Ahmad Sarhan in daring raid involving disguises, intense airstrikes and reportedly aimed to extract intelligence before assassinationIskander Khabibulin (ynetnews)
like this
Maeve likes this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
Cost of running a mastodon instance
how much does running a mastodon instance of 1000 users costs?
Disabling Images and allowing only text is one of my condition. So if I do that, will that change cost?
I am thinking of a VPS so that i can have greater control over instance functionality
How much Storage and RAM will be required roughly?
like this
Endymion_Mallorn and Fitik like this.
jk
like this
TheFederatedPipe likes this.
like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
paulstamatiou.com/hosting-your…
Digital Ocean is used as an example because they have a quick setup Mastodon option. It looks like $14/mo minimum if you're going to run Elastisearch. Without that tool in memory you might get away with 1GB of memory which is $7/mo. But the author also notes that with Elastisearch his VPS uses about 2GB of ram so he's actually running the 4GB $21/mo plan.
Hosting your own Mastodon server
Join the Fediverse on your own termsPaul Stamatiou (paulstamatiou.com)
like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
To give you ballpark figures. Self-hosting will not save you much compared to that.
Software like Akkoma or GoToSocial will save you some CPU and RAM costs, but are more optimized for smaller instances.
Masto.host - Fully Managed Mastodon Hosting
Masto.host was built from the ground up to make running a Mastodon instance easy.Masto.host
like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
Why do you want to run an instance for that many people? Do you have 1000 people already, or is that just a number that you decided to work with? Why would people be interested in joining an instance with less functionality than the bigger ones?
Also: does it have to be Mastodon, or would you consider other alternatives? Pleroma and GoToSocial would be a lot easier to manage.
like this
Endymion_Mallorn and TheFederatedPipe like this.
I am trying to run an instance where only people verified using legal Documents should be able to post, comment, vote.
That is to increase transparency and keep spammers away. I Intend it to be a political website
I will read about GoToSocial and Pleroma
(I understand that this may not be the right post to ask, but still....)
Donald Trump says he’s willing to travel to China to meet Xi Jinping
Donald Trump says he’s willing to travel to China to meet Xi Jinping
He has repeatedly expressed an eagerness to speak with the Chinese leader. Read more at straitstimes.com.The Straits Times
No More Refugees, Trump Said. Except White South Africans. - The Daily Podcast
like this
frustrated_phagocytosis, Lasslinthar, aramis87 and themadcodger like this.
The Heritage Foundation developed a secret plan to brand critics of Israel - including Jews - as terrorist supporters so that they could be deported, defunded, sued, fired, ostracized
Great investigative journalism from the New York Times.
The Washington DC Heritage Foundation recently dispatched a team to Israel to meet with major players in Israeli politics, including the Israeli Foreign Minister, the Israeli Defense Secretary, and U.S. ambassador Mike Huckabee.
The Heritage team was in Israel, in part, to discuss a secret policy paper: Project Esther, the foundation’s proposal to rapidly dismantle the pro-Palestinian movement in the United States, along with its support at schools and universities, at progressive organizations and in Congress.
Project Esther outlined an ambitious plan to brand critics of Israel as “effectively a terrorist support network” so that they could be deported, defunded, sued, fired from their jobs and ostracized
It singled out anti-Zionist groups that had organized pro-Palestinian protests, but the intended targets stretched much further.
In pitch materials for potential donors, Heritage presented an illustration of a pyramid topped by “progressive ‘elites’ leading the way which included Jewish billionaires such as George Soros and Governor JB Pritzker of Illinois.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/18/us/project-esther-heritage-foundation-palestine.html
like this
Blackout, NoneOfUrBusiness, frustrated_phagocytosis, bacon_saber, Pebble_Clef and Drusas like this.
Standard protest tactics are a good start
Block, obstruct and hinder in every way you can conceive of
If that doesn't work? Frankly, riot
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
like this
Drusas likes this.
like this
frustrated_phagocytosis likes this.
We do not allow editorialized headlines, please revert it back to the original or we'll have to remove it.
Edit OP continues posting hours after being told to revert the headline. Removing.
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
Staff cuts forced this forecast office to shut overnight. Then, a tornado hit.
The Jackson, Kentucky, office is one of a growing number of forecast offices unable to cover an overnight shift since the Trump administration cut staffing levels through buyouts and firings.
Access options:
* gift link - registration required
* archive.today
Except for all the data that says that they absolutely stole the election.
sdvoice.info/trump-lost-vote-s…
First and last links are the data. The middle links are for us stupid people that need to be told how to read the data in the last link.
Trump Lost. Vote Suppression Won. Here Are The Numbers…
Harris would have gained at least another 3,565,000 votes, topping Trump’s official popular vote tally by 1.2 million.NNPA (The San Diego Voice & Viewpoint)
It will only get worse...
Just wait till these lapses in available shift coverage hit those of us in Tornado Alley...
🤦♀️ 🤡 🖕
This is 10000% what was voted for. Especially in states like Kentucky.
Now, they better not cry when FEMA doesn’t do shit, cause they voted for that as well.
The thing is - they use these disasters to punish communities they don’t like.
In Oklahoma - I am a (non medical) volunteer for the Medical Reserve Corps. There were calls when small towns like Stroud were hit in 2023 - there was no mobilization for Tulsa in 2023. Both our governor and our lieutenant governor were completely out of the picture, no one even knew who was in charge to even declare a state of emergency. Places in Tulsa were without running water or electricity for weeks after. No one cared - Tulsa is mostly Black and votes Blue.
We are looking at severe weather in Oklahoma tonight. I guarantee, if it takes out a small town like fucking Tishimongo or something - a place that voted for our governor - they’ll get help. If it’s Tulsa - lol.
It's God punishing the queer and homo lovers in
checks notes
Deep red southern Kentucky!
Russia launches war's largest drone attack after peace talks, Ukraine says
The largest known Russian drone attack since full-scale war began in 2022 killed a woman in the Kyiv region and injured at least three people, Ukrainian authorities said early on Sunday, as Moscow stepped up strikes following peace talks on Friday.
Russia launched 273 drones by 8 a.m. local time (0500 GMT), targeting chiefly the central Kyiv region and the Dnipropetrovsk and Donetsk regions in the country's east, Ukraine's air force said.
Based on data provided by the air force, this was Russia's largest drone attack on Ukraine of the war. On the eve of the third anniversary of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 23, Moscow launched a then-record 267 drones.
I can only imagine the PTSD the sound of drones must cause people & I wouldn't want to cause that in some passing refugee.
“The highest quality oil there is on the planet, and they only gave me a drop of it…so I’m not thrilled,” Trump joked.
This headline is such bad clickbait it's basically misinformation.
SnarkoPolo
in reply to MuskyMelon • • •seaQueue
in reply to MuskyMelon • • •SnarkoPolo
in reply to seaQueue • • •seaQueue
in reply to SnarkoPolo • • •aramova
in reply to MuskyMelon • • •toy_boat_toy_boat
in reply to aramova • • •gravitas_deficiency
in reply to toy_boat_toy_boat • • •toy_boat_toy_boat
in reply to gravitas_deficiency • • •"secure" isn't a secure password, dude.
edit - it was funny until i posted it
gravitas_deficiency
in reply to toy_boat_toy_boat • • •toy_boat_toy_boat
in reply to gravitas_deficiency • • •