Democratic National Committee vice chair David Hogg's plan to spend $20 million to primary older Democratic incumbents in Congress has sparked intense anger from some lawmakers.
Provided that the person calling for it has the opinions you prefer on guns. And only guns.
No, that conclusion does not follow from the facts at hand. There are any number of issues that raise my ire. I've railed just as vociferously against Hogg for guns as I have against any number of democratic fossils, for reasons ranging from pro-genocide, to appeasing Republicans, to senility. Gun control is just one of many disqualifying conditions. That he and I share an absolute disgust for Retired-in-Place Democrats is not sufficient to rehabilitate his image. He is an honorary fossil, and needs to go along with them.
Nobody gives a shit about the incumbent positions on anything, with the possible exception of their retirement. Get them the hell out of office, and bring in some actual leftists.
Provided that the person calling for it has the opinions you prefer on guns. And only guns.
As always, there's some excuse for why the person who is trying to move the party to the left shouldn't be doing that.
I don't know if you didn't get the memo or something, but the left likes guns now. Gun control is not "moving the party to the left". Gun control is a plank in the old, establishment platform, and needs to be thrown out along with those ancient fossils.
Of all of the people in this thread for whom the second amendment fills the void where a personality would be in a more complete person, not one cares about the incumbents' opinions on firearms.
Nobody gives a shit about the incumbent positions on anything, with the possible exception of their retirement. Get them the hell out of office, and bring in some actual leftists.
As always, there's some excuse for why the person who is trying to move the party to the left shouldn't be doing that.
It's neat watching the party go from "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good! It's just a little genocide!" to "This guy who is primarying centrists who hold us all back doesn't agree with republicans enough!"
Of all of the people in this thread for whom the second amendment fills the void where a personality would be in a more complete person, not one cares about the incumbents' opinions on firearms.
You are not alone in this. The party has long used gun control as a purity test, rejecting candidates (and alienating voters) who offer anything less than full-throated support for gun control.
Until just now, when centrist control of the party is threatened.
No part of my comment history suggests I have ever supported Wayne LaPierre.
You and I probably agree on 99% of the issues, but you're willing to alienate me on the basis of this particular, obviously divisive issue.
You are not alone in this. The party has long used gun control as a purity test, rejecting candidates (and alienating voters) who offer anything less than full-throated support for gun control.
But that purity test is one of the things that needs to be excised from the party.
Gun control does not have the broad support it did in the 90's. The wave of concealed carry adoption in the late 90's/ early 2000's has radically expanded the number and political diversity of gun owners across the country. The party has thus far failed to recognize this shift in the political climate. We can see the results.
Further, Hogg isn’t trying to move the party to the left. He openly supports legacy Democrats like Pelosi and Hillary who built the failed party, and he is looking for younger candidates who will keep the party right where theose decrepit fossils planted it.
Because you don't like that he's not Wayne LaPierre?
Just seems like whenever there's someone who is trying to get the party to move to the left,
Again, "gun control" is not a leftist issue. Gun control is keeping the party from moving left.
Further, Hogg isn't trying to move the party to the left. He openly supports legacy Democrats like Pelosi and Hillary who built the failed party, and he is looking for younger candidates who will keep the party right where theose decrepit fossils planted it.
Just seems like whenever there's someone who is trying to get the party to move to the left, suddenly there's some criterion for why they shouldn't.
Bernie's too old and that was a problem from 2016 until the second Biden announced. It's a problem again now that Biden is out of office. AOC is a woman and that's suddenly a problem because she's seizing the moment. Hogg doesn't agree with the NRA on guns.
You want nothing to do with Hogg or his push to primary useless incumbents. And your only stated reason is because he's not pro-school-shooting enough.
I came to the conclusion 2 hours ago that the problem with this country is not the government, but the two parties holding it hostage. I envision a country where we form 2-3 new parties who can represent their constituents and protect the Constitution. I think Dems are traitors too. I think I would vote for a party that was lead by AoC and guided by Bernie. Idk who hogg is but ya i have serious questions about a 25 year olds understanding of our country and it's issues. I think if he's vice chair of the DNC i should know more about him and his qualifications to chose candidates? Don't you beleive in transparent democracy?
Nah, he's still a Democrat, even though his position conflicts with the electorate. As are you.
The "test" here isn't one of purity. Here, the test is whether he can represent that electorate. He can't.
His position on gun control is the most obvious example, but it's not the only one. He idolizes Pelosi and Clinton, and wants to replace "useless incumbents" with Baby Nancy and Baby Hillary.
Mistake for who? Not a mistake for me, not a mistake tactically considering the policy and popularity polling, not a mistake when you consider that these people have been suppressing popular and well polling progressive policies and candidates for decades and still managed to lose the presidency and both houses to a goddamn moron…
All of this shit, all of these “reasons” they list in opposition to Hogg’s initiative, they are all bullshit. Bullshit and deflections and distractions from the fact that they are concerned exclusively about the bottom line for their wealthy benefactors, and about their own as well. The irony that is not lost on anyone is that they are the assholes who did this to us in the first place, and would you look at that, Donald Trump is about to hand them a tax cut.
Na the fascists are also going to need to get rid of the 2A soon. They don't need headlines like "ICE impersonator shot by citizen while conducting an extra judicial abduction"
You can't put that genie back in the bottle on any reasonable time scale, there's more guns than people in the US, and half of them are basically invisible to authorities.
He was a student during the stoneman Douglas School shooting, then picked up skeet/trap shooting, and it's currently one of the vice chairs of the Democratic national committee.
Did he go to college for IR? Did he work under anyone in congress? Did he have a career? Advanced degree? Youtube channel? Why is he given 20 Million dollars to fund candidates? Sounds like he might be a good fund raiser with a recognizable name. A face to bring people in, but is he qualified to be making high level decsisions on behalf of all democrats and really americans? Your goal is to run the country for americas benefit right? Not the democrat party?
Well that's a great point! I thought about it, and I did some research on how the DNC selects its members. I concluded that the DNC itself is an elitist organization that does nothing but provide fake opposition to a real problem with the republicans. I find that the institution itself flys in the face of fair represenation. I've really felt that way since 2016 when they didn't let Bernie take the nomination. But now I'm extra irate. and as i sit here staring at a child who is going to be determining the parties future I have real questions and concerns.
You have snarky answers and downvotes. You got a real address to my criticism or did I lose you somewhere and this is all I will get?
I looked in the mirror and what i saw was just another question. Why couldn't the DNC find a candidate to beat Trump or Mitch McConell or any other psychopath entrenched in office for 30+ years? Why is the DNC's messaging and strategy so bad that they can lose an election to a deranged tyrant... twice.
Either way I looked in the future mirror and you're starving in a camp in El Salvador, or maybe starving at your house. It's the ghost of this christmas future. Have fun when supply chains collapse and your can't exchange your money for food buddy!
Ah thank you. Wish it said what his BA from harvard was in, but sounds like he's got some good experience with activism and policy so that's nice. Hopefully he can find some good candidates/
"What a disappointment from leadership. I can think of a million better things to do with twenty million dollars right now," swing-district Rep. Hillary Scholten (D-Mich.) told Axios.
"Fighting Democrats might get likes online, but it's not what restores majorities," she added.
The issue is we get majorities and then nothing gets done with depresses turnout.
We don't want to primary these old conservatives, we'd much rather them represent their constituents, but they've shown time and time again they won't.
We'd rather they get out of the way and resign, but they won't put the future of the party over their own personal power.
I agree about "fuck em", let's get out with the old and in with the new.
But what majorities are you talking about? I keep seeing this repeated all over the internet- the sentiment that Democrats get nothing done when they have control. The problem is that I'm 33 years old and the Dems have only had control of the federal government for a few months of my life, and that's when they passed the ACA. I can't really make a judgement on what the Dems do when they're in power because they largely have not been.
you owe it yourself to read up on american political history and; if you did; you would learn that every time they've had control of all 3 branches of government; they've squandered it by letting a one or 2 democrats derail all of their plans, meanwhile republicans steamroll over their own dissenters every time they're in control.
you'd start to see that this pattern keeps happening again and again.
As I said, they have only had control for 4 months in my lifetime. Before that you need to go back to 1961-1969 with Kennedy and Johnson. I would actually need to do more research to find out whether they had a Supermajority or not, but it's not even worth looking up because going that far back in time shifts the politics of the parties significantly and is not very relevant to today. The Democratic Party still has plenty of Southern Conservatives all the way into the Carter years.
So I would love to know what pattern you are seeing.
democrats had full control from 1993–1995, 2009–2011, 2021–2023 and majority control from 2011-2015 & 2023-2024. in other words: 12 years of complete or majority control out of the last 33 years.
every single time their agenda was thwarted by one or two lone dissenters within their caucuses; where republicans completely steamrolled over their own dissenters.
You should looked up how Congress works. They need a Supermajority to pass most legislation, and the Dems only had that for about 4 months from 2009-2010. The last time they had that control was under Kennedy/Johnson in the 60's.
Even without those DINOs they still didn't have a Supermajority. Honestly I think most people just don't understand the difference between a majority and Supermajority and mistakenly believe 50 is enough in the Senate.
The old moderate Democrats are not going to change...they keep trying to reach conservatives in a "middle" that keeps moving right. I'd say getting Democrats elected, then replacing them with better democrats in future elections would be the way to go, but there's something to be said for getting nowhere with the same.old.people.in.the.same.old.positions.election.after.election.and.never.gaining.a.meaningful.majoritye. Either the positions or the people need to change. Since the existing people are not willing to change their positions on the issues, people must be the next thing to change. The party needs to progress into the future, with younger, more vital blood.
they were using the same tactics as the gop are to stay hidden, basically DNC had manchin and sinema to take all the flak, and gop had mitch mcconnel and some of the flipflopper to take all the heat, while the rest collude with each other and with putin and billionaires(both parties, how to not give voters what they want, but enough that they wont rebel against us)
Why would you want Bernie Sandwrs to change. He’s trying to reach conservatives because they are normal people who have been deluded and manipulated into voting for nonsense, but they basically support the same stuff normal people want.
I agree with the older Dems, but not for their reasons.
No, we should not support the candidates that Hogg supports. Because Hogg is very opposed to 2A rights, and ipso facto any candidate that he supports will also be opposed to 2A rights. And if you think that we're gonna just vote our way out of this, I've got some very, very bad news for you.
Primary the old fucks with young leftists (hopefully ones that actually understand economics and tax policy)? Absolutely! Primary them with ones that ideologically aligned with Hogg? No.
That was my gut instinct too, who is this kid, how did he get a vice chair position, and ya who are these young candidates and do they understand global economics, international relations, military. What roles in congressional comittees will they be qualified for. I'm tired of seeing morons overseeing nukes. Thats gotta stop.
He survived a school shooting. I think he has good reasons for wanting gun control. Although personally I agree that citizens need to be armed against our fascist state.
Most people are for gun control, branding yourself as anti 2A doesn’t really inspire hope that he can cross the aisle. It doesn’t have to be a toxic issue but it’s delicate. After checking the wiki he seems like he’s got some qualification. Left some room to be desired but I’ll judge the man by his work.
Right now, the majority of people in the US are in favor of deporting all undocumented immigrants. Right now, the overwhelming majority of people are opposed to transgender rights (e.g., using bathrooms that correspond to their gender, participating in sports, having access to gender-affirming care, and so on). Going back to the late 80s/early 90s, most people would not have believed that Satanists had the right to free exercise of their religion (and many people still don't today). If you go back 75 years, the majority of the country believed that 'separate but equal' was entirely reasonable; sure, let those negroes have rights, but letting them live in our neighborhoods, go to our schools, get married to our women...? Absolutely not!
This is what is referred to as "the tyranny of the majority".
The whole purpose of the bill of rights is that they are RIGHTS, and not intended to be something that is up for a popular vote. All gun control is intended to prevent people from exercising their right to keep and bear arms.
You’re going to have to share your data because it conflicts with mine. I don’t think you understand what a majority is. Technically it would be 175 million people to form a majority in the USA. We live in an oligarchy, that’s tyranny of the majority by a minority. A majority of Americans do not vote.
A majority of the people in the US are probably unaware of the recent deportations. A majority of us lack reading comprehension skills above the 6th grade level. A majority of us don’t understand the 3 branches of government. I can share my data, but I’d like to see yours first
Here's one source on immigrations, although the numbers are slipping as the cases of illegal and wrongful deportations continue to make headlines. Even with that, Americans are fairly even split. Here's a solid source on transgender policy; while some things that are positive for transgender people have broad support, some things that are unequivocally bad--like preventing minors from accessing gender-affirming care, including puberty blockers, bathroom bills, etc.--have net +10 and greater support. (+31 on only allowing people to play sports that correspond to the gender they were assigned to at birth means that it's about a 65/35 split, with 65% in favor of preventing transwomen from participating in womens' sports.)
Majorities agree with existing protections in the U.S. for transgender people against hate crimes and discriminatory firings, but transgender inclusion in athletics, prisons, and public bathrooms all receive more opposition than support.
I'm really tired of voting for better candidates that are in favor of reproductive rights, and LGBTQ+ rights, that want religion out of politics, that support genuinely free speech, and then also want to eliminate 2A rights. We're already seeing what 75 years of libs and progressives working to disarm themselves has done, and the result is that ICE agents aren't getting gunned down in the streets when they're kidnapping people, and the fash are free to do whatever the fuck they want with zero fear of consequences.
I love his energy, but I sincerely disagree with the whole gun control narrative right now. Leaning into that when there are about to be a shitload of far right militias deputized is an absolutely fucking idiotic plan.
Those laws wouldn't get passed until this whole thing is over and there are progressives in office able to actually do things, if that happens. You wouldn't have gun control as the law of the land in two months. And guns need to take a massive fucking back seat in America. No more blood cult shit, because that's what it is.
Go for what you actually want, which is freedom. Freedom is when you aren't surrounded by people with guns.
So like… I was in my early thirties when this happened. I know. I remember. I watched some of the news livestreams as it went down.
I said what I said understanding that.
I am by no means trying to diminish, demean, discredit, disparage, or otherwise detract from his experience. Im saying that I am very fucking concerned that an actual war is coming, and disarming right before a war is a great fucking way to get killed.
Gun control means: mandatory background checks, waiting periods, bans on previously convicted violent criminals owning guns, potentially magazine limits or limits on fully automatic licenses to specific users (like you may need to demonstrate you have proficiency and be a member of a gun club). None of this goes against "the right to bear arms".
It does not mean nobody can buy guns or that guns are taken away - this is the fearmongering always pushed by the very conservative, very pro-Trump NRA.
We agree on what "gun control" means. We do not agree on the need for gun control, nor do we agree on the affects of gun control on the right to keep and bear arms.
Mandatory background checks
That means forced to go to an FFL dealer before trading guns with your friends and neighbors. No private sales, even to trusted parties. Unacceptable. Every legitimate purpose that a mandatory background check provides can be accomplished by creating public access to NICS. With that in place, every seller can know, and so is expected to know their buyer's status. But, "public access to NICS" is not part of our shared definition of "gun control", and has been fervently opposed by Democratic leadership every time it has been proposed.
waiting periods,
Even in theory, waiting periods can only achieve their intent with first-time gun buyers. For everyone else, they serve no purpose other than to hassle gun owners. You could theoretically walk in to a gun store with an AR15 hanging from your chest, a Remington 870 over yo
... show more
We agree on what "gun control" means. We do not agree on the need for gun control, nor do we agree on the affects of gun control on the right to keep and bear arms.
Mandatory background checks
That means forced to go to an FFL dealer before trading guns with your friends and neighbors. No private sales, even to trusted parties. Unacceptable. Every legitimate purpose that a mandatory background check provides can be accomplished by creating public access to NICS. With that in place, every seller can know, and so is expected to know their buyer's status. But, "public access to NICS" is not part of our shared definition of "gun control", and has been fervently opposed by Democratic leadership every time it has been proposed.
waiting periods,
Even in theory, waiting periods can only achieve their intent with first-time gun buyers. For everyone else, they serve no purpose other than to hassle gun owners. You could theoretically walk in to a gun store with an AR15 hanging from your chest, a Remington 870 over your shoulder, a S&W 500 holstered on your waist, a 1911 on your hip, a Glock 26 on your ankle, and an LCP in your pocket. But, while you're walking around with three defensive pistols, a big game handgun, a shotgun, and an intermediate caliber rifle, the clerk at that gun store won't let you leave with a bolt-action .22LR plinker. Suffice it to say, waiting periods are unacceptable.
bans on previously convicted violent criminals owning guns,
The only reason to even mention such bans is to deceive people into thinking they don't already exist. They do. That deceit is completely unacceptable.
potentially magazine limits
The usual limits proposed are 6 or 10 rounds. These numbers are not derived from any studies on defensive need. They do not consider whether 6 to 10 rounds is sufficient to stop a deadly threat. They do not consider multiple attackers. Unacceptable. The various proposals often apply to guns that can accept such magazines, rather than the magazines themselves, and would thus make most existing guns illegal. Only firearms with fixed magazines could comply with such laws. Unacceptable.
limits on fully automatic licenses
Fully automatic firearms, suppressors, SBRs and SBSs are already overburdened with excessive licensing restrictions. Unacceptable.
Harassing gun owners with these ridiculous gun control measures is costing elections. David Hogg was brought to the DNC by the inept leadership to support their losing message on gun control. He and his pet issue are part of what the Guillotine Party needs to excise.
The USA is alone in the entire world in that it has a mass shooting almost every day of every year, and yet when faced with modest controla you're like, "if I, a citizen with no gun dealer licensr can't just sell whatever guns whenever I like to neighbours and friends then any changes are unacceptable".
You say pro gun-control candidates will cost the Democrats votes, well I think I just found a single issue voter.
You say pro gun-control candidates will cost the Democrats votes, well I think I just found a single issue voter.
It's not my vote you need to worry about. I voted for Harris, Biden, Clinton, Obama, Obama, Kerry, Gore, and more Democratic governors, legislators, judges, commissioners, and administrators than I feel like counting. Democrats didn't, and won't lose my vote over gun control.
The votes you should be concerned about are the ones who aren't here, arguing with you. The votes you should be concerned about are the ones that turned former bellwether swing states into reliably red states. Ohio for example. A state that voted for the eventual winner in 36 of the last 41 elections, going back all the way to the civil war. A state that is now considered reliably red.
Democrats did nothing to prepare for the kids and grandkids of the first generation of concealed carriers across the country. Kids who now have their own carry licenses. The Democrats never bothered to consider the effects of 30 milli
... show more
You say pro gun-control candidates will cost the Democrats votes, well I think I just found a single issue voter.
It's not my vote you need to worry about. I voted for Harris, Biden, Clinton, Obama, Obama, Kerry, Gore, and more Democratic governors, legislators, judges, commissioners, and administrators than I feel like counting. Democrats didn't, and won't lose my vote over gun control.
The votes you should be concerned about are the ones who aren't here, arguing with you. The votes you should be concerned about are the ones that turned former bellwether swing states into reliably red states. Ohio for example. A state that voted for the eventual winner in 36 of the last 41 elections, going back all the way to the civil war. A state that is now considered reliably red.
Democrats did nothing to prepare for the kids and grandkids of the first generation of concealed carriers across the country. Kids who now have their own carry licenses. The Democrats never bothered to consider the effects of 30 million new gun licensees in 42 of the 50 states, nor their families and friends. Never bothered to consider that voter opinion on guns might have shifted since the civil rights era.
Gun control is one of the more prominent issues of dissatisfaction with the Democratic party.
Everyone over 60 years old should be kicked the fuck out of the party and way be made for younger people who have to actually live in the fucking world being created by them.
Where was the outrage when AIPAC dropped money bombs on progressive primaries to silence opposition against Israel and the Genocide of Palestinians?
The DNC is dead to most USians, the party leadership just refuses to acknowledge it even when their candidates and strategies lose to literal outright fascists.
No, this is the bare minimum I will accept in order to not consider the DNC my enemy.
Burn it down.
Also, age isn't the problem, the problem is money and a rigid party ideology.
Where was the outrage when AIPAC dropped money bombs on progressive primaries to silence opposition against Israel and the Genocide of Palestinians?
Well when people called it out, Reddit and Lemmy said anyone who saw this was:
Antisemitic for not wanting murder
A Tankie/Russian Bot
Somehow wanting Trump to win by having better candidate to win against Trump
Sore losers who didn't like a "fair" election like Trump
A Bernie bro who hates $THING
If you look at the lemmy.world modlog, so many people calling out this were removed and banned, and then the userbase acted dumbfounded when the legitimate users were "quiet" after being banned, so it verified their bias of "everyone who disagrees with what my favorite political tells me is a bot/troll".
I agree, I lost a huge amount of respect for the people running and moderating lemmy.world after dealing with their reactions to people simply upset that a genocide is happening.
I had an interaction with one of their mods and it was very disappointing to see them so confidently on the side of silencing voices speaking up about genocide.
Sometimes I get the feeling lemmy.world is run by a bunch of centrists who's hobby it is to undermine leftism because they are afraid of leftwing beliefs exactly the way pathetic conservatives are, and it makes it hard to take the entire community seriously.
Some of the prominent very active low effort posters like Pugjesus have absolutely trash views when you actually get into a conversation about their beliefs.
I had an interaction with one of their mods and it was very disappointing to see them so confidently on the side of silencing voices speaking up about genocide.
Was it JeffW or JordanLund? Both of those dudes can't help defend genocide. Especially JL, he openly hates Black Lives Matter.
Sometimes I get the feeling lemmy.world is run by a bunch of centrists who’s hobby it is to undermine leftism because they are afraid of leftwing beliefs exactly the way pathetic conservatives are, and it makes it hard to take the entire community seriously.
And they call us the Russian Psyop/bot. I've had so many people say things like "I'm a leftist, but [defending the most conservative positions possible]." At least .ml is honest in their intentions.
Some of the prominent very active low effort posters like Pugjesus have absolutely trash views when you actually get into a conversation about their beliefs.
And he's so fucking smug! He will defend his trash opinions, say he's the smartest
... show more
I had an interaction with one of their mods and it was very disappointing to see them so confidently on the side of silencing voices speaking up about genocide.
Was it JeffW or JordanLund? Both of those dudes can't help defend genocide. Especially JL, he openly hates Black Lives Matter.
Sometimes I get the feeling lemmy.world is run by a bunch of centrists who’s hobby it is to undermine leftism because they are afraid of leftwing beliefs exactly the way pathetic conservatives are, and it makes it hard to take the entire community seriously.
And they call us the Russian Psyop/bot. I've had so many people say things like "I'm a leftist, but [defending the most conservative positions possible]." At least .ml is honest in their intentions.
Some of the prominent very active low effort posters like Pugjesus have absolutely trash views when you actually get into a conversation about their beliefs.
And he's so fucking smug! He will defend his trash opinions, say he's the smartest one in the room, and then act like he's the victim when he says something like "I don't think you should ally with these people when ICE comes knocking" or "I don't have to respect the pronouns of people I don't like."
Lemmy.world is a majority of my blocklist. I like a handful of users from it. But the mods and admins have cultivated a inverted MAGA mentalitt around themselves. Anytime you critize their favorite thing, you'll be banned and blocked. And then they claim it's evil when .ml does the exact same thing.
On top of everything above, the snark against any criticism of us foreign policy, the DNC, or neo/liberalism has been getting really gross. Completely overriding any genuine discussions or nuance about the topics.
I got perma banned by pugjesus on one of his comms for defending the blowback podcast and the journalists who created it
"Fighting Democrats might get likes online, but it's not what restores majorities," she added.
There are currently 2 vacant seats in Congress, which won't be filled until the fall, left empty by Democrats who died in office. We're not going to restore majorities by electing people who keep dropping dead.
City prosecutors have filed criminal charges against six men involved in a chaotic legislative town hall, including the private security guards who dragged a Post Falls woman out of the Coeur d’Alene High School auditorium.
The whole lot is so bad that it is technically apple sauce at this point .... and not the good kind either .... the kind of sauce that is more of a dumpster juice
In Idaho, false imprisonment is punishable by up to a year in jail and a maximum fine of $5,000, while misdemeanor battery carries a maximum sentence of six months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000.
If they do, then police better have some id ready to go before engaging, because one could assume that that they're just mercs. Never let them take you to a second location.
Former Speaker Kevin McCarthy said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is poised to raise gobs of money and potentially overthrow the old guard of the Democratic Party.
Lol yeah, she's touring the country throwing rallies while Schumer is trying to lead, "We stand with Israel. We will win." chants with the least amount of charisma possible and Jefferies is doing interviews and insisting the Democrats' biggest issue is messaging.
She's young, she could decide to run for Chuck's Senate seat in 2028. She would be just as compelling a Presidential candidate in 2032 or 2036....
.... But if a fair election is held in 2028, it is essential that Democtats field the best possible candidate, not just the next one up. (Hi, Gavin!) If AOC thinks that's her, then I will happily support that. If she supports someone else (Booker, Walz, etc), I will also be listening. But if we fuck this one up, and Vance or Eric Trump or Sean Hannity get elected, that might be game over for Democracy here. We may not get another chance.
As a NY State resident, I am eagerly looking forward to voting for AOC in some capacity in 2028, whether it's for Senator, VP, or President. I'll let her decide where she thinks she can create the most change.
This is true, and it only got dramatically worse after they took office. The way he handled the Zelinsky visit was abominable, so he gets to tack that onto his resume now.
They might put him forward precisely because he has no charisma. The understanding would be that Trump was calling the shots, even if he didn't hold the office. Puppets stop flopping around once their controller puts their hand up their ass and grabs the controls
I'd be happy to see an AOC/Buttigieg ticket in 2028.
Warren for sec of treasury. Walz for HUD or even better, cabinet level position in charge of figuring out the young man problem. He's representative of the role model a lot of young men are missing imho.
I don't wanna see another dem pres candidate that's older than me (mid 50s) EVER AGAIN. The problems my kids are facing aren't going to be fixed by old people, and while I'm not quite there yet, I'm fucking close enough.
I mean VP in recent history is there to balance the ticket. If the presidential candidate is weak in one area, they pick a VP strong in that area. Sometimes the VP is just to lock in a competitive state.
The winner picks the VP. If number 2 works well, great, but the winner picks.
They just need a candidate that can get 100m votes. Like it should not be hard in the age of stolen data to pick a person who can get 100m people off the couch. I don’t care what the Democrats like at this point. If we can’t figure out a candidate and policy that will invigorate 100,000,000 people we don’t even deserve to be running.
can you get 1/3 of the country to vote against fascism? challenge: impossible
AOC isn't that leftist anymore. Years of washington have certainly made her more bearable to moderates. I came around to her a long time ago, she's an excellent speaker and very intune with the issues.
Both a great idea and one that will absolutely piss of the conservatives that are happy to see their young men embrace far right ideologies even if it comes with violent hatred in the process.
At about 70 minutes, he states that the greatest innovation from the United States is the middle class, and he makes a good argument IMHO. He talks about how there were about seven million men that came back from World War II having proven themselves, with some confidence, and of course being in uniform doesn't hurt. They had opportunity for education, help with starting a career and affording a home, and all that made them attractive mates and led to the baby boom and the rise of the middle class. (I know it's an oversimplification, of course.)
Here's a fun conspiracy theory for you – what if somebody recognizes that sequence of events and thinks the best thing we could do would be to replicate it? If that was your goal, what would you do to make it happen, but with a twist to the far right?
Ya my mom can barely grasp what’s going on right now. No concept of the future beyond her life. I’m pushing 40 and got no idea what the kids want or need or how our education system got so fucked. we really can’t be having geriatrics making policy that will affect the future beyond their immediate life
Yea i don't really mind the SCOTUS issue. That goes away with the two party issue, politicized judges with zero integrity is a failure of congress. I like that judges hold benches and get lifetimes of experience and wisdom. I like the old age and prudence rule in courts. Congress ya, 70 is probably getting to old. There's no reason to throw them out of the party, but they do not need to be holding seats when we need to be constantly generating new politicians. They all became so obsessed with their own power they forget they will eventually die with no one to carry their torch. There needs to be a better transition of leadership, as well as coherent leadership. People of all ages should be represented in congress similar to how we are in public. If the boomers are 30% of the population they shouldn't be holding more than 30% of the seats. Fair equitable representation.
You think that's the problem. Old people running? No, it's this lopsided old people majority that the baby boom brought. They could run, but no one would vote for them.
Until we die off and get out of the way, this isn't going to change.
I’d be happy to see an AOC/Buttigieg ticket in 2028.
I would fear for AOC's safety with Buttigieg as her VP. And not just because he's McKinsey. Because there are a lot of democrats that hate her and would consider Buttigieg an acceptable replacement.
I know the argument constantly rages - too left! Too centrist! and I don't know which one would be more effective.
On the other hand, the closest we've come to a real left candidate at least in my lifetime was Sanders and the thumb on the scale against him was pretty corporate blue - and the mainstream lost, so maybe we should try it the other way?
AOC makes Trump and his shit-lickers afraid. Pelosi and Schumer don't spark any fear.
And the DNC keeps the ones who he can rally around the flag to blame for anything bad. Because no one really likes Pelosi and Schumer. People like AOC.
Remember when calling them weird was working, making them cower and the media loved it? And then they just... Stopped because how dare anyone be rude to fascists.
Kevin McCarthy can go fuck himself. Seriously. I don’t care WHAT he says. He’s a fucking shill and helped flush the country down the drain. Fuck anything that bastard says.
Why would they stop? Cause you asked? Sadly this online crap is what’s making money and game companies are and have always been about money, all of them without exception
It's so weird how you can tell someone is from the US(or consume tons ofor mainly consumes American media) based on the propaganda they are parroting.
Stop believing your coroporate overlords when they keep telling you that petitions, non-violent protests, boycotts, the UN, etc. doesn't work. They do, that's why they tell you they don't. Because then you'd actually make oligarchs accountable.
Yeah, they mention it obliquely at the end, but it really should be more obviously stated. Presumably they assume anyone reading the article is already familiar with the game
Hot take: If its a free to play online multiplayer game, its not very upsetting.
Yeah, fans want another skate in the vein of the trilogy and it sucks we wont get that... But if i dont have to buy this game then idc if it will hit a premature death when it stops being supported. Yeah its a waste of development resources and i wish online-only games didnt exist for the sake of preservation, but i wont be upset if i get to play this game and dont have to pay a dime.
Im not entirely sure itll be ftp though, so this take can be completely void.
If its FTP and all mechanics beyond cosmetics can be accessed with grinding (skate-pun... nice) rather than passes and subscriptions then a great many people need to STFU.
Mechwarrior Online is FTP and Online only, has been since 2013 when it was released, still has players, still gets updates and still makes money without p2w shenanigans. Ive got 3600 hours logged, I still play regularly. Sometimes I buy some shit in game because I'm a grownup with disposable income and 3600 hours worth of entertainment is worth a few bucks.
It can be done well either way. If its a premium purchased game eventually it will make more sense financially for them to release a sequel, and the player base will move on. With F2P (If its done well) the games longevity is limited solely by wether or not it keeps making money.
If we're looking at it pessimistically the industry seems to be moving towards buying a premium AAA title, being charged appropriately, being coerced into buying a season pass to play online and then still being harassed with microtransactions.
Turning my business mind towards Skate, they can make money through sources other than the customers.
Clothing companies, in game billboards, in game music deals, skateboard companies... you get the game in front of enough people and the players wont be the whales.
I dont know that for certain. Just saying theres revenue streams that a F2P game can leverage if they can get the player count high enough, Its something Id tollerate from a good enough F2P game especially if its done well, Skate culture has always had certain brands associated with it so it COULD be done organically.
How come I took flack for this same opinion? I'm in the pre alpha and it's coming along nicely. Same feel of skate 3, tight mechanics, I don't see the big deal. It's free. If you don't like it don't play it what's the big deal?
People are upset they arent getting the same type of game the IP is known for. Unfortunately the IP is being used to push a different type of product. I do think people are justified to be upset about that.
As a gamer who wants more to play and wants to pay less, i am ok with this particular IP(which i dont particularly care about) becoming ftp, even if it degrades the overall experience. If this was happening to another IP i enjoy, I might be more upset about this.
Tony hawk games were the only other skating games, but they had button-press controls and goofy physics. Skate came out with much more realistic physics and the thumbstick flicking controls that made tricks feel purposeful. I think people who do skate (or wanted to) got pulled in for the realistic skating lines and tricks. There was also still enough over-the-top jumps and tricks to keep younger kids entertained.
Tons of reasons. My reason is that it felt like the first skate simulator. And the control scheme was freaking brilliant and intuitive. I couldn't adapt to Session... too complicated.
I don't understand why games don't have two modes: paid, offline single player experience, and F2P online multiplayer experience. The former ensures the game will survive once the servers shut down, and the latter is a gravy train if it works out. Surely that doesn't add much to the development time...
People expect something different, because the Skate series was different up until now. They should've branded it differently, if they didn't want fans asking for singleplayer.
Is anybody in this thread in the playtest? Gonna be lots of feet in mouths lol. Is it perfect, no, what is. Is it SKATE, yup. Does being online only take anything away? Not really.
Is that a good enough reason not to enjoy it now? I'm laughing about the downvote from salty folks. I get it, but if you don't like it save your energy. Lots of people are having a good time with it and your opinion isn't going to keep us from that. When it goes away we go back to ps3 emulation.
The problem is that no one asked for an MMO. The game series always offered singleplayer. The gameplay is likely made worse by being an MMO. People who are not fans of the series can just skip this game, but those who are fans of the so-far-singleplayer series are those who are asking for a singleplayer experience.
I'll never understand why a certain subset of people are so adamantly against multiplayer games. Y'all are so loud and annoying.
Single player AI is often repetitive and boring; the unpredictability of human players is what makes online games so much fun. You people should take those sticks out of your asses and give them a try sometime. You might find that you like them.
Some folks don't care about having the ''unpradictability of human players''. Or at the very least don't think that benefit makes up for the downsides of an always online game, such as always having to have an internet connection, server downtime, lag, the pricing models that pay for those servers, game modes that require you to interact with other players, etc.
I like multiplayer games, and I like single player games, I like couch co-op, and pvp, mmo's, and fighting games, but I think it's about having the right tool for the job.
But online multiplayer games that are spin offs or sequels to single player games have a well deserved bad reputation. Due to the numerous instances where the motivation wasn't to make the game better, but instead to force the more profitable monitary models that online multiplayer games allow for. Fallout 76 stands out as a prime example.
It's not always a bad change mind you, sometimes it really adds a lot to the game... like... uhhhh... er... Ultima Online? Im sure there are other examples too.
So maybe you can take that stick
... show more
Some folks don't care about having the ''unpradictability of human players''. Or at the very least don't think that benefit makes up for the downsides of an always online game, such as always having to have an internet connection, server downtime, lag, the pricing models that pay for those servers, game modes that require you to interact with other players, etc.
I like multiplayer games, and I like single player games, I like couch co-op, and pvp, mmo's, and fighting games, but I think it's about having the right tool for the job.
But online multiplayer games that are spin offs or sequels to single player games have a well deserved bad reputation. Due to the numerous instances where the motivation wasn't to make the game better, but instead to force the more profitable monitary models that online multiplayer games allow for. Fallout 76 stands out as a prime example.
It's not always a bad change mind you, sometimes it really adds a lot to the game... like... uhhhh... er... Ultima Online? Im sure there are other examples too.
So maybe you can take that stick out of your ass and let folks enjoy what they like? ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Yes I love it when a game can arbitrarily be made unplayable when the servers are taken down, even if someone didn't want to use the multiplayer in the first place.
Well, as the others already said, it's a matter of taste and different factors play into it, but your argument with the AI is precisely why I find this decision so jarring: You don't need nor want unpredictability in a skating game.
It's not a competitive genre where the unpredictability makes it interesting. And I remember watching a video of a guy playing Skate where NPCs would constantly walk into his path and it was the most infuriating thing. If there would've been no NPCs, no unpredictability, the game would've been better. Of course, with an MMO, other players will probably have no collision. But if you can still see them where you're skating, they'll still get in the way of you seeing what you're skating on, particularly if you run into trolls.
I'm not completely negative to the MMO concept. Maybe it is fun to see just the sheer chaos of hundreds of others skating in the same place. Maybe they have some sort of idea to actually make interaction with other players relevant in some way. Maybe it's kind of cool for folks to log into the Skate MMO and j
... show more
Well, as the others already said, it's a matter of taste and different factors play into it, but your argument with the AI is precisely why I find this decision so jarring: You don't need nor want unpredictability in a skating game.
It's not a competitive genre where the unpredictability makes it interesting. And I remember watching a video of a guy playing Skate where NPCs would constantly walk into his path and it was the most infuriating thing. If there would've been no NPCs, no unpredictability, the game would've been better. Of course, with an MMO, other players will probably have no collision. But if you can still see them where you're skating, they'll still get in the way of you seeing what you're skating on, particularly if you run into trolls.
I'm not completely negative to the MMO concept. Maybe it is fun to see just the sheer chaos of hundreds of others skating in the same place. Maybe they have some sort of idea to actually make interaction with other players relevant in some way. Maybe it's kind of cool for folks to log into the Skate MMO and just hang out. Or maybe it's only an MMO hub-world and you don't have to see other players on the individual courses. But yeah, I'm just not holding my breath.
I can provide an earnest argument, if you like. I put 400+ hours into DotA in college, and enjoy games like Valheim, Lethal Company, and Monster Hunter with friends regularly, but pretty adamantly avoid competitive anonymous multiplayer these days.
I dislike the increased commitment of multiplayer games. When playing with a group, I have to worry about "letting down" the group, and must play fully sweaty at all times. Learning is also much more stressful and frustrating due to the social element. Even if the group isn't toxic, I'm more aware of my failures and their consequences.
There are engaging and difficult PvE games that challenge me, with good AI. Souls, Sekiro, DOOM Eternal, and Hollow Knight are all excellent examples with lots of unique and interesting challenges. I also enjoy stuff like speedrunning, which can take easy but fun games like Mario Odyssey and raise the skill ceiling infinitely.
Matchmaking eliminates the feeling of progression. I love the satisfaction of improving. I.E. Beating Sekiro and starting NG+ only to crush
... show more
I can provide an earnest argument, if you like. I put 400+ hours into DotA in college, and enjoy games like Valheim, Lethal Company, and Monster Hunter with friends regularly, but pretty adamantly avoid competitive anonymous multiplayer these days.
I dislike the increased commitment of multiplayer games. When playing with a group, I have to worry about "letting down" the group, and must play fully sweaty at all times. Learning is also much more stressful and frustrating due to the social element. Even if the group isn't toxic, I'm more aware of my failures and their consequences.
There are engaging and difficult PvE games that challenge me, with good AI. Souls, Sekiro, DOOM Eternal, and Hollow Knight are all excellent examples with lots of unique and interesting challenges. I also enjoy stuff like speedrunning, which can take easy but fun games like Mario Odyssey and raise the skill ceiling infinitely.
Matchmaking eliminates the feeling of progression. I love the satisfaction of improving. I.E. Beating Sekiro and starting NG+ only to crush the opening areas that took hours because your skills have improved so much, travelling through an earlier area in Dark Souls and marvelling at how easy it feels now, or setting a huge new PB in a speedrun. Matchmaking with strangers eliminates these moments, because your MMR increases with your skill, trapping you at a 50-ish% win rate permanently, unless you smurf, which is short lived and kinda scummy. You may improve and hit a win streak, but will quickly be slapped back as your MMR increases. And I don't find seeing that number climb up to be nearly as satisfying as real moments that prove your skill.
I enjoy some atmosphere and narrative. It's tough to deliver a cool world via character trailers exclusively, and most multiplayer games never get an "Arcane". A single player experience will always have some of that, and it can be awesome.
Pacing and variety. A good game experience is paced out with moments of calm, maybe some puzzle solving or narrative, and moments of intensity and tough fights. That stuff is good when done well. Something like DOOM Eternal gets my heart pounding like nothing else in arenas on higher difficulties, but knows to let you breathe in between, so I can enjoy that heart pounding pace for more than 30m at a time. Online games will try with something like spreading players out in a Battle Royale, but it's not the same.
Also, I just like pausing, lol. If my wife needs something, it's nice to be able to just put the game down, I don't like being chained to my desk for 20-40 minutes depending on how the game goes because I'll lose rank and disappoint the team.
Also, I say anonymous because a lot of these problems disappear if you play exclusively with friends. I love the Smash series, for example. You have an objective skill benchmark in the friend you're playing with, as well as someone who's understanding when you have to go or do something. That's really cool, but also damn hard to schedule and not something I do often for PvP.
Competitive anonymous multiplayer is great, for those that like it. More than happy to let you enjoy that. But personally these cons outweigh the pros for me, and I'll continue to be disappointed when something I'm excited for turns out to be competitive anonymous PvP.
I'm not worried about it; EA games go offline long after I'm done with them. I've never seen them take down a game that wasn't already completely dead 5 years ago.
My major concern is with development. I don't trust them to make a great game without fucking something up somehow.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have in recent days deported the Cuban-born mother of a 1-year-old girl — separating them indefinitely — and three children ages 2, 4 and 7 who are U.S. citizens along with their Honduran-born mothers, their lawyers said Saturday.
The three cases raise questions about who is being deported, and why, and come amid a battle in federal courts over whether President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown has gone too far and too quickly at the expense of fundamental rights.
Lawyers in the cases described how the women were arrested at routine check-ins at ICE offices, given virtually no opportunity to speak with lawyers or their family members and then deported within three days or less.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have in recent days deported a Cuban-born mother of 1-year-old girl, separating them indefinitely. In two other cases, three children ages 2, 4 and 7 who are U.S.
I don't understand why you'd ask that. And I struggle to explain why this baffles me so much. Why would you think the devs of a game you like, a game that many people seem to like, might be considering making it free? If it was doing badly, sure. But apparently their business model is working. So why the fuck?
Hey Todd Howard, do you plan to make Elder Scrolls 6 free to play? ... okay, horse armour says bad example.
It's not that far-fetched, to me. $10 is a pretty weird price for a game, especially these days. Many games that launch at such a low price point tend to only keep that pricing temporarily; either as an early-access discount before the price goes up for the "final" build of the game, or it'll go the other way and go free-to-play as the devs put the game on life support. It also seems like an especially unusual one-time price for a game that still seems to be actively worked on. It's a very curious price.
Since it seems to be the sort of game you play with a group of friends, it seems like it might be easier to actually make that happen with a $0 price point since you can ask someone to play without asking them to spend money.
Well, there are a open source games, which are also free to play without microtransactions or other manipulative financing scheme. 0AD, Beyond all reason, Luanti and many more. Free games doesn't necessarily need to implement bad stuff, but some chose to do so.
Von Brandmauern und Friedensbewegten ohne moralischen Kompass
Am 18. April fand in Dresden erneut eine rechte Demonstration statt, welche man durchaus als konsequente Querfront bezeichnen kann. Während nicht unerhebliche Teile der CDU eine Normalisierung der faschistischen AfD forcieren und die Brandmauer immer weiter unterminieren, wurde diese in Dresden mit Anlauf und Ansage eingerissen. Mal wieder.
So versammelten sich am Karfreitag zirka 3.000 Friedensbewegte fast aller Spektren und Sphären zu einer selbsternannten Friedensprozession. Unter dem Motto „Frieden kennt keine Brandmauern“ lud eine nur schwer verdauliche Melange aus Querdenker*innen, Putinfans, kruden Antiimperialist*innen, Antisemit*innen und anderen rechtsdrehenden Realitätsverweiger*innen auf den Postplatz. Unter ihnen Dieter Dehm, Jürgen Fliege und Marcus Fuchs. Der gemeinsame Aufruf endete mit den Worten: „Nie wieder Antisemitismus! Nie wieder Faschismus! Nie wieder Krieg! Kommt nach Dresden! Bitte!“
Wie viel von diesem Motto zu halten war und
... show more
Von Brandmauern und Friedensbewegten ohne moralischen Kompass
Am 18. April fand in Dresden erneut eine rechte Demonstration statt, welche man durchaus als konsequente Querfront bezeichnen kann. Während nicht unerhebliche Teile der CDU eine Normalisierung der faschistischen AfD forcieren und die Brandmauer immer weiter unterminieren, wurde diese in Dresden mit Anlauf und Ansage eingerissen. Mal wieder.
So versammelten sich am Karfreitag zirka 3.000 Friedensbewegte fast aller Spektren und Sphären zu einer selbsternannten Friedensprozession. Unter dem Motto „Frieden kennt keine Brandmauern“ lud eine nur schwer verdauliche Melange aus Querdenker*innen, Putinfans, kruden Antiimperialist*innen, Antisemit*innen und anderen rechtsdrehenden Realitätsverweiger*innen auf den Postplatz. Unter ihnen Dieter Dehm, Jürgen Fliege und Marcus Fuchs. Der gemeinsame Aufruf endete mit den Worten: „Nie wieder Antisemitismus! Nie wieder Faschismus! Nie wieder Krieg! Kommt nach Dresden! Bitte!“
Wie viel von diesem Motto zu halten war und welche Absicht die Veranstalter*innen wirklich hatten, zeigte sich sowohl auf, als auch vor der Bühne, die von Kilian Forster von den Dresdner Jazztagen tatkräftig unterstützt wurde. Neben regressiv-pastoralen Tönen von Jürgen Fliege und Videoeinspielern von diversen Friedensikonen, die sich nicht mehr dagegen wehren konnten, kamen zum Beispiel auch Justus Frantz, Eugen Drewermann, Uwe Steimle, Dieter Hallervorden, Christian Klar und Ulrike Guérot zu Wort. Musikalische Beiträge gab es unter anderem vom Putin-Fan Toni Eisbrenner. Wem die Namen nichts sagen, kein Problem. Dem werden wir jetzt Abhilfe schaffen. Ganz kurz, versprochen.
Jürgen Fliege war einst öffentlich-rechtlicher, evangelischer Talkshowpastor, der schon früh Kritik auf sich zog, da er für die Scientology-Sekte und andere esoterische Scharlatanerie warb. Seit spätestens 2020 trat und tritt er immer wieder auf Querdenken- und Querfrontveranstaltungen auf. Zudem ist er Mitglied der Partei Die Basis.
Justus Frantz ist ein deutscher Pianist und Dirigent, welcher 2014 die Annexion der Krim durch Russland rechtfertigte und sich selbst als Putin-Versteher bezeichnet.
Eugen Drewermann, Psychoanalytiker, Theologe und suspendierter katholischer Priester, ist Erstunterzeichner des „Neuen Krefelder Appells“, in welchem auf den antisemitischen Verschwörungsmythos vom „Great Reset“ zurückgegriffen wird, um sich die komplexe Weltlage möglichst simpel zu erklären.
Ulrike Guérot, ihres Zeichens Politikwissenschaftlerin, Putin-Versteherin und Ikone der Querdenkenbewegung, sagte: „Ich bin nicht rechts, ich bin nicht radikal und ich bin keine Schwurblerin, weil das niemand hier ist…“ Sie forderte auf der Bühne, man müsse die „einseitige Kriegsverantwortung in der Ukraine zurückweisen und gezielt verbreitete Russophobie beenden“.
Zu Uwe Steimle, den man juristisch einwandfrei einen antisemitischen Jammerossi nennen darf, wurde an anderen Stellen schon mehr als genug gesagt.
Der große Überraschungsgast, Dieter Hallervorden, bewies erneut, dass er nur noch Honig im Kopf hat. Er versuchte sich mit schiefen historischen Vergleichen für den Frieden stark zu machen, wobei auch er lediglich Putin zur Seite sprang. Natürlich durfte auch seine einseitige und verkürzte Kritik an Israel nicht fehlen.
Christian Klar, mehrfach vorbestrafter Neonazi aus dem thüringischen Gera, der zum diesjährigen Neonazitrauermarsch im Februar prominent als Kranzträger fungierte, komplettierte dann die neuerliche Querfront zu Dresden.
Und als ob das alles nicht schon gruselig genug wäre, stimmte Dieter Dehm seine eigene Version des „Lied der Deutschen“ an, wobei es förmlich zu spüren war, wie wichtig es ihm war, vollen Herzens „Deutschland, Deutschland über alles“ über den Postplatz zu schmettern, obwohl es nicht erlaubt sei. Was natürlich Quatsch ist. Dehm, im Selbstverständnis Linker, freut sich auf einer Querfrontveranstaltung nur konsequenter Weise darüber, auch die Faschisten Jörg Urban und Tino Chrupalla im Publikum begrüßen zu dürfen und solidarisierte sich auch gleich noch mit der rechten Verlegerin Susanne Dagen.
Was alle Menschen auf der Bühne zu einen schien, war, dass man keinerlei Kritik an Russlands Angriffskrieg hat, im Gegenteil. Schuld haben alle anderen, nur nicht Putin. Auch im Antisemitismus und der Dämonisierung Israels war man sich auf der Bühne offenbar einig.
So verwundert es dann auch nicht, wer und was sich da vor der Bühne und auf dem Marsch wiederfand. Parteidelegationen schickten die BüSo’s, das BSW und Die Basis. Die Freien Sachsen präsentierten sich mit einem Infostand auf dem Postplatz. Die AfD war mit Transparenten der Stadtratsfraktion und der des Landtages anwesend und marschierte mit. Im Gleichschritt u.a. mit den Jungen Nationalisten/ Elblandrevolte. Ebenfalls anwesend waren Jörg Urban, Vorsitzender der AfD Sachsen und Mitglied des sächsischen Landtags, und Matthias Rentzsch, Mitglied der AfD-Bundestagsfraktion für den Wahlkreis Dresden II – Bautzen II. An bekannten und bekennenden extrem Rechten wie Michael Brück, Chrisitian Klar und Stefan Trautmann lies man sich wieder nicht stören und auch nicht an der Teilnahme der Freien Sachsen und anderer offensichtlicher Neonazis.
Das Ganze hatte rein gar nichts mit „Nie wieder Antisemitismus! Nie wieder Faschismus! Nie wieder Krieg!“ zu tun und sollte es auch nie. Wenn sich Verschwörungsgläubige, Antisemit*innen und Neonazis treffen, geht es immer darum sich gegenseitig selbst zu bestätigen und um das Erringen von Deutungshoheit und Hegemonie. Das Motto galt einzig und allein der Selbstimmunisierung gegenüber Kritik und der weiteren Normalisierung rechter und antisemitischer Narrative.
Bluesky had a massive outage the other day, and people are wondering how could a “decentralized” social network go down like that?
You know how? It’s not decentralized yet. Most of the users are still on the main server and that’s what went down.
You don’t see stuff like this happening on Mastodon or the other ActivityPub services. You know why? They are all decentralized and if one server goes down, the others don’t.
It’s not a complex concept.
Look I like Bluesky. I like that there are people that I want to follow over there. There’s a community there for me. But I also have a even bigger community on the Fediverse (Mastodon etc.).
What bugs me is that Bluesky touts that it’s decentralized when it’s NOT.
Not yet at least.
I mean it can be decentralized and that makes it far b
... show more
Bluesky Has And Outage And People Wonder Why.
Bluesky had a massive outage the other day, and people are wondering how could a “decentralized” social network go down like that?
You know how? It’s not decentralized yet. Most of the users are still on the main server and that’s what went down.
You don’t see stuff like this happening on Mastodon or the other ActivityPub services. You know why? They are all decentralized and if one server goes down, the others don’t.
It’s not a complex concept.
Look I like Bluesky. I like that there are people that I want to follow over there. There’s a community there for me. But I also have a even bigger community on the Fediverse (Mastodon etc.).
What bugs me is that Bluesky touts that it’s decentralized when it’s NOT.
Not yet at least.
I mean it can be decentralized and that makes it far better than X/Twitter and the other Web 2.0 apps out there that are centralized and walled off. But it’s still not decentralized — not yet.
De senaste åren har graden av decentralisering i Fediversum ökat. Enligt en undersökning fanns 97% av användarna i Fediversum på de 5 största instanserna (0,5%) år 2022. Nu har denna siffra sjunkit. De 30 största instanserna (0,2% av alla instanser) har nu 85% av alla användare. De fem största har bara cirka 34% av alla användare.
I was gonna disagree, then I realized that the server is en/fr Canadian. So it's perfectly appropriate. So.. yeah, my bad. Maybe people just disagree with the opinion or something. The game is quite well reviewed and popular, afaik
Det har en man från Hönö utanför Göteborg dömts till. Han dömdes för grov allmänfarlig ödeläggelse, två fall av grov skadegörelse, grovt djurplågeri, två fall av grovt vapenbrott, tre fall av grovt olaga hot samt diverse missbruksbrottslighet. Han åtalades för mordförsök i ett fall man dömdes inte för det.
De mest använda sociala medierna i Sverige är Youtube, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, LinkedIn, TikTok, Flashback, X, Pinterest, Discord, Reddit, Roblox, Twitch, BeReal och Threads. Bluesky, Yubo och Mastodon har färre användare.
De mest använda sociala medierna i Sverige är Youtube, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, LinkedIn, TikTok, Flashback, X, Pinterest, Discord, Reddit, Roblox, Twitch, BeReal och Threads. Bluesky, Yubo och Mastodon har färre användare.
I wonder if all the bot activity on reddit makes it look so busy that people are confused when they come somewhere with far fewer bots around?
I notice significantly more positive interaction with (at least what I believe to be) real humans here than I did on reddit in my last couple of years there.
I've noticed the same. I've also noticed it become slightly more combative and strawman-y with the influx of new folx, but maybe getting better again lately? Anyway, this is just going by anecdotal/vibes, and it's definitely better than mainstream/commercial socials.
I've also noticed it become slightly more combative and strawman-y with the influx of new folx, but maybe getting better again lately?
I'd like to think it's because the mods here are a lot less likely to aid and abet that shit. I don't know if it is, but that's what I'd like to think.
What I like about fedi is that while we usually give people the benefit of the doubt, we don't tolerate dog whistles, sealioning, or other ""subtle"" methods of spreading bigotry and intolerance.
Whereas the big commercial platforms we on't do a thing unless it's blatant harassment, or matches one of the 12 slurs on their no-no list.
I think it's the same phenomenon in multi-player gaming - community hosted servers tend to have less garbage flying around compared to centrally hosted company servers.
If you run your own server, you're far more likely to care about the user experience. And if you run your own server, you make your own rules and can manage how you'd like - no obligations.
People always talk about wanting to grow Lemmy, but honestly I like it a lot more the way it is. You can comment on a post that's been on All for 6 hours and still get plenty of thoughtful responses. On reddit, there was so much noise - especially on major threads - that commenting was like pissing into the wind.
i can see the same thing, things that have been published for hours see steady activity, even some which are lively for a good few days, it feels less like flitting between a bunch of new things which is useful
The solution on that on Reddit has been, retreat into more niche communities, remove default subs from your feed. Right now the way to make Lemmy usable is to browse All, because otherwise there isn't enough content, but I bet as it grows it will go the same way.
For Lemmy that's what I used to do yeah, bc there was no better option.
PieFed offers numerous additional options though, most especially categories of communities, including user customizable and shareable Feeds. You can even have your cake and eat it too - like subscribe to no political communities to avoid them showing up in your Subscribed, but then it's a click away in the News and Politics Topic area. Or, the keywords filter options (for e.g. "Trump", "Musk", or whatever you want) include All, None, and Some, allowing you to refine your Subscribed feed to meet your interest level in a particular subject.
And then for very low-volume communities, you can even set up Notification triggers upon every new post (I also use this for a community I mod using a Lemmy alt) - e.g. poetry tends to not be highly upvoted so super difficult to catch organically on either All or Subscribed (you might have more luck there sorting by New, but this requires blocking a TON of communities like for sports and individual locations and such).
PieFed really is an entirely different
... show more
For Lemmy that's what I used to do yeah, bc there was no better option.
PieFed offers numerous additional options though, most especially categories of communities, including user customizable and shareable Feeds. You can even have your cake and eat it too - like subscribe to no political communities to avoid them showing up in your Subscribed, but then it's a click away in the News and Politics Topic area. Or, the keywords filter options (for e.g. "Trump", "Musk", or whatever you want) include All, None, and Some, allowing you to refine your Subscribed feed to meet your interest level in a particular subject.
And then for very low-volume communities, you can even set up Notification triggers upon every new post (I also use this for a community I mod using a Lemmy alt) - e.g. poetry tends to not be highly upvoted so super difficult to catch organically on either All or Subscribed (you might have more luck there sorting by New, but this requires blocking a TON of communities like for sports and individual locations and such).
PieFed really is an entirely different experience than Lemmy! Maybe as it becomes successful, the Lemmy devs may start to port the features over? But it's doubtful, as existing requests have languished for like 5 years already - PieFed's being written in Python rather than Rust really makes a difference in such matters.
So you can easily subscribe to everything but exclude certain topics, is that what you mean? I have a subscribed feed but there's too many new communities I might want to see and too much work to subscribe to everything, so I do it the other way by blocking things instead and browsing all. The main thing I don't like about PieFed on first glance is that the image thumbnails are quite large and only one or a few posts are shown on the screen at once if they are image posts, seems very mobile focused, is there a way to change that in the settings? I prefer to only open images after reading the title and deciding I want to look at it, then closing it again so there are more posts simultaneously on the screen.
It's cool that it uses Python, I like using Python and dislike working in low level languages.
So I never used it but apparently Reddit has this feature of multi-communities, which the only way to really replicate that on Lemmy is to have many many many accounts on several different instances, each one dedicated to a different topic. Like on one you could have it be dedicated to news and politics while on all the others you could block those, thus allowing you to get your fix but only when you so choose.
This highly-requested feature (which might make it Lemmy eventually but iirc someone said that it has been on the roadmap or perhaps it was just a feature request on GitHub for five years already) is available all within a single account on PieFed. PieFed lacks a little bit of polish compared to Lemmy, but also has more functionality, in areas like this. It's more "experimental" than Lemmy then, and being in Python is going to catch up a heck of a lot sooner. I suppose there's a question of how well Python would work at large scales of millions of people in comparison to Rust, except looking at subscriber numbers for the entire Fediverse including even Mastodon, that'
... show more
So I never used it but apparently Reddit has this feature of multi-communities, which the only way to really replicate that on Lemmy is to have many many many accounts on several different instances, each one dedicated to a different topic. Like on one you could have it be dedicated to news and politics while on all the others you could block those, thus allowing you to get your fix but only when you so choose.
This highly-requested feature (which might make it Lemmy eventually but iirc someone said that it has been on the roadmap or perhaps it was just a feature request on GitHub for five years already) is available all within a single account on PieFed. PieFed lacks a little bit of polish compared to Lemmy, but also has more functionality, in areas like this. It's more "experimental" than Lemmy then, and being in Python is going to catch up a heck of a lot sooner. I suppose there's a question of how well Python would work at large scales of millions of people in comparison to Rust, except looking at subscriber numbers for the entire Fediverse including even Mastodon, that's really not a concern for now, and the way things are going (e.g. look at Bluesky snapping up people who refuse both X and Mastodon, and love its fully featured UI) may never be a concern in the future either.
I spent a year on Lemmy learning how to curate my feed, and in like a week on PieFed realized that the vast majority of that is unnecessary here. e.g. when you sign up for a new account, the wizard asks you what your interests are and then pre-subscribes you to communities based on your answers (ofc you can always leave them later and add new ones continually). It also asks what keywords you may want to block, like "Trump" or "Musk", and offers not only All or None, but also Some. It's really quite amazing how well it's all handled!
What you are saying about image sizes sounds at a guess like Tile or even Wide Tile mode, which if a community looks like mostly images I suppose it may default to? Whereas other communities and topic areas reading the titles is more helpful, so for those it defaults to "List" mode. (Although I'm not sure if that's simply a stored setting or based on measurement of things like image size to title width or some such). See for instance News and Politics where the thumbnails are smaller, as opposed to memes@lemmy.world where they take up a much wider space.
I don't like the very recent change making it harder to switch these settings by adding in another click required, but the developers are extremely open to feedback and if others think similarly then it may be changed yet again, possibly in mere days to weeks (rather than Lemmy's timeframe of multiple years).
There is also app support in Interstellar and a fork (not yet official but still in testing) of Thunder. Though the webpage view is quite fine as it is, usually:-).
Speaking of, I just noticed a new Settings option for "compact UI", with numerous values, which completely change how memes@lemmy.world looks (no image previews, in Firefox on Android, not sure how desktop and other browsers would handle it), and an even tighter setting removes vertical spacing as well to fit more posts into a denser space - exactly as you wanted!
I bet if you go through the sign-up wizard, you'll be entirely sold on it:-) piefed.social/ is the experimental flagship instance, but there are several other options available as well.
lemmy.dbzer0.com is a damn fine instance as well, with very solid admins, it's only drawback being that it's still using Lemmy, which especially for established users (who have already learned how to block stuff and navigate to existing communities) is mostly fine. But damn, PieFed is so exciting how it's developing new features monthly! Definitely worth following if nothing else (although for me, this is my main now:-).
I think there's a lot of development going on with the lemmy UI, for example the lemm.ee developer has next.lemm.ee for his new UI design beta. I'm looking out for a golden age of lemmy UI development where everyone's copying each other's functionality and they all continually improve until it ends up being about whichever interface personally prefer, like we had with 3rd party reddit apps.
To be clear to others, though, PieFed is itself its own lemmy instance first, but it's open source so works as an example UI that could be implemented by any other instance. Every instance of lemmy is potentially different, not just in which version of lemmy code they use but any number of modifications the instance admin may choose to apply.
Now make people restating it 800 times half the thread. Switched a few weeks ago, and honestly the fact I have yet to see the words heckin or wholesome, nor the annoying as fuck story style of banal metaphor they think is relatable and super clever, sounding like a chimichanga doused in tabasco making its emergency 3AM exit be known, has all sold me. Reddit seems to be a bunch of people who think they're super unique and progressive as they salivate over Marvel movies and rehash the same 9 political talking points, 50 posts, and 4 philosophy quotes they don't understand ad infinitum. It is reddit without redditors, and doesn't feel like it is curated by the DNC's PR department. What's not to love?
I think lemmy'd be ideal if it was double our triple its current size. Maybe just large enough to convince r/askhistorians to jump ship.
I would say "^This" in jest but didn't want to traumatize you, so wrapped it in this sentence:-). But yeah, I decided to leave Reddit for good around the time of the protests. Fortunately I had Kbin (a now-defunct alternative to Lemmy, the project carried forward by Mbin and somewhat in spirit by PieFed which I am on now) to jump to, but seriously I was going to leave all that trash regardless. I did not enjoy what it was doing to me - like how argumentative and defensive I was having to become upon saying ANYTHING at all, and more often choosing not to respond in places like r/pop(ular) bc of the feedback that would inevitably come.
The Threadiverse (threaded-style defederated forum software, currently Lemmy + Mbin + PieFed) isn't perfect, but is so much better! It requires a ton more effort to set up than Reddit did (well, Lemmy does - check out PieFed's setup wizard and you'll never look back!
... show more
I would say "^This" in jest but didn't want to traumatize you, so wrapped it in this sentence:-). But yeah, I decided to leave Reddit for good around the time of the protests. Fortunately I had Kbin (a now-defunct alternative to Lemmy, the project carried forward by Mbin and somewhat in spirit by PieFed which I am on now) to jump to, but seriously I was going to leave all that trash regardless. I did not enjoy what it was doing to me - like how argumentative and defensive I was having to become upon saying ANYTHING at all, and more often choosing not to respond in places like r/pop(ular) bc of the feedback that would inevitably come.
The Threadiverse (threaded-style defederated forum software, currently Lemmy + Mbin + PieFed) isn't perfect, but is so much better! It requires a ton more effort to set up than Reddit did (well, Lemmy does - check out PieFed's setup wizard and you'll never look back!), yet unlike corporate enshittified Reddit is worth it. Breathe the free air here!
Also an interesting article to read about the addictive effects that such platforms engender in their unwitting participants: medium.com/@max.p.schlienger/t… .
Lol I literally had a strict rule where I downvoted every comment that started with "this", no matter what else was written. Fuck that noise.
I did quite enjoy that article, although I would disagree with his conclusion. As can be guessed from my user name, I think the nature of capitalism is to blame, not personal habit. It seems tenuous to claim that a phenomena that has affected humans by the billions can be remedied by personal choice. A critic may say that is exactly buying into the illusion of capital. What is a systemic issue of production and distribution being reduced to one of personal agency, moral failing, and consumer preference.
One of the best books I've read in a long time is about precisely this. Immediacy, or the Cultural Style of Too Late Capitalism by Anna Kornbluh. It is a spiritual successor the Frederic Jameson and Postmodernism: The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, as well as Debord and others.
Her argument is mainly that as markets have come to dominate every aspect of our existence, market logic has come to dominate culture. The curren
... show more
Lol I literally had a strict rule where I downvoted every comment that started with "this", no matter what else was written. Fuck that noise.
I did quite enjoy that article, although I would disagree with his conclusion. As can be guessed from my user name, I think the nature of capitalism is to blame, not personal habit. It seems tenuous to claim that a phenomena that has affected humans by the billions can be remedied by personal choice. A critic may say that is exactly buying into the illusion of capital. What is a systemic issue of production and distribution being reduced to one of personal agency, moral failing, and consumer preference.
One of the best books I've read in a long time is about precisely this. Immediacy, or the Cultural Style of Too Late Capitalism by Anna Kornbluh. It is a spiritual successor the Frederic Jameson and Postmodernism: The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, as well as Debord and others.
Her argument is mainly that as markets have come to dominate every aspect of our existence, market logic has come to dominate culture. The current logic she names Immediacy. The idea being that in all aspects, including academia, culture is dominated by personal, immediate experience. It is nominalism, the idea that mediation of experience through abstraction, whether philosophical concepts or difficult art, is pretentious, impersonal, boring, amd tedious. We demand immediate response from that we engage with. Whether it be social media, music, novels, or movies, they are required to be immediately relatable, translatable, and consumable.
This is why shows like Rings of Power feel vapid and lacking. They are not mythical people in which we can posit ourselves, in which we can aspire and dream of greatness, of justice, of friendship and loyalty. The show feels like it is sneering and rolling its eyes at these. No one is really like Aragorn, come the fuck on. Hokie ass garbage.
Instead it offers us... ourselves in a fantasy setting. Symbolism and themes are hard and boring and pretentious, so they will pursue their own petty interests as we would and squabble and pout. Shows like this just feel like our world in a new setting. The orcs are "complicated", under the auspices of moral complexity but really just to denude morality from the world altogether. No grand messages. That shit is lame. And so we are more invested in Aragorn the moment his face changes to tenderness,as he looks down at Sam, willing to defend his his master against this 6' tall man with a longsword wielding a candlestick, and shows a deep moral complexity. This is using something rare in our world, a powerful man, a Numenorian, admiring the courage of a hobbit gardnerer with a candlestick. Admiring his bravery and loyalty. And as a mysterious, threatening, hardened traveller showing compassion and vulnerability.
It is striking in its contradiction, actual subversion, difficulty, and seeming otherwordly goodness. Not that shows have to portray traditional morals to be compelling. They need to portray something that is not immediatelt accessible to us. But that goes directly against the market logic. The same logic that creates fetishized commodities that seemingly appear at our door. That turns the complexities of climate disaster, exploitation, global supply chains into little entertainment boxes that exist simply because we desire it to.
The gig economy, where employment is mercurial, "nomadic", precarious, is celebrated as freedom. The destruction of new possibility is celebrated as authenticity. Live your truth. I heard an ad for lawyers that offered to help on "your divorce journey".
And as this world offers us constant ennui and anomie by fuflilling desires it convinces us we have, it also implores us to act now! The environment is collapsing, recycle your cans for Christ sake! Buy products in brown packaging you fucking monster! So it feels almost irresponsible to dream, foolish to hope, impossible to imagine. The actual message of Marvel movies, novels that are part confessional diary, green marketing, is that "this is the only world. Even in space. Even with superheroes. Even in Middle Earth. The only arrangment. Even your wildest fantasy cannot escape this reality. There is no world outside of capitalism. All is exchange and consumption and endless banality", As Mark Fischer put it "It is easier to imagine the end if world than the end of capitalism".
So I, and Kornbluh, do actually agree the solution is a moral imperative. But not to engage with the machine in a moderate way. Trying to curate an eddy in a flood. But to make difficult art. Art that is mediated. Art that requires investment and separation and abstraction. Just now, when the world is on the brink of endless catastrophe, is it most appropriate to dream of different possibilities. To read Lord of the Rings and look at Aragorn not as sentimental and trite, but as aspirational.
Lastly, if you have interacted with teenagers there is a deep, bedrock cynicism that eclsipses irony and sarcasm. Those things imply a hope thst was betrayed. They largely have never hoped, have never stayed up breathelessly reading a challenging book, or listened to an album on repeat that fundamentally changes them, that they feel beyond their bones. Which is full tragedy. Adolescence should be when dreaming through new and exciting media elavates you, opens new horizons. There is overwhelmingly apathy, amusement, boredom. Little curiosity or imagination. Their entire worlds have been robbed of them. They can sense it. They don't tend to love or even like social media. But their horizons are closed. Nothing left even to dream of. They don't have the faculties to even sense what it is they are missing, they just know it is.
Very sorry for the length. I just really love the book, and thanks for the article. It was a good productive read.
If the question is capitalism vs. personal choice, I ask por que no los dos?
I never watched Rings of Power, though get what you mean about Aragorn in Lord of the Rings.
Haven't children been that way ever since Watergate? Caveat: perhaps to an ever-increasing degree, as the number of such events increases. Who today that does not already own a home ever have a hope to do so? (In most Western nations) Who hopes for social security in the USA to be more than merely yet another tax paid out without expectation of remuneration? Who expects a return on health insurance either? When you have to pay out multiple thousand before even a single dime gets paid out, in that realm of low cost you essentially don't have health insurance (and then do, briefly, and then if there isn't a cap on payments, back to again not).
The cynicism is entirely logical. Or at least was prior to this year. In the future, people will merely either be alive vs. not, it would seem, e.g. with some projections saying that over a billion people will die in the next 5-20 years, and possibly half (to
... show more
If the question is capitalism vs. personal choice, I ask por que no los dos?
I never watched Rings of Power, though get what you mean about Aragorn in Lord of the Rings.
Haven't children been that way ever since Watergate? Caveat: perhaps to an ever-increasing degree, as the number of such events increases. Who today that does not already own a home ever have a hope to do so? (In most Western nations) Who hopes for social security in the USA to be more than merely yet another tax paid out without expectation of remuneration? Who expects a return on health insurance either? When you have to pay out multiple thousand before even a single dime gets paid out, in that realm of low cost you essentially don't have health insurance (and then do, briefly, and then if there isn't a cap on payments, back to again not).
The cynicism is entirely logical. Or at least was prior to this year. In the future, people will merely either be alive vs. not, it would seem, e.g. with some projections saying that over a billion people will die in the next 5-20 years, and possibly half (to all) of the population of Earth a couple decades after that. They know this... they aren't stupid, and unlike the oldest generations, aren't sticking their heads in the sand purposefully. Their eyes are wide open as they are being brutalized, by the very same people they call "family". Whatever adolescence should or should not have been is no longer relevant, as extinction itself is now on the table and potentially imminent in their - and even our - lifetimes (especially with the aid of the specter of the likes of WWIII to help speed it along?).
Or if none of that is true, it at least might be, and either way seems to sum up how they feel.
Thank you. Just took a breif look at Hexbear. I wasn't able to see much but from one comment I was able to see, they seem like colourful characters. Lemmygrad are obviously tankies. Don't know what I was expecting from the name.
Thank you for the explanation. Apparently, they defederated from the instance I'm using because of transphobia. Is it worth changing instance to see their content? (And perhaps I should to begin with?) I wasn't aware of transphobia when I joined it originally.
Ok. Thank you for clarifying. I had initially considered joining them because the description said "leftist meme space" which is similar to a subreddit I frequented but I gave up when the form basically asked me if I was a vegan.
That if Trump annexes Canada, European countries should provide weapons and ammunition to Canadian guerrilla groups. Tends to scare people IRL. Didn't get into an argument on Reddit over it. They just report me.
The people who say there's no activity tend to be lurkers and they mean post activity not comments.
If you're on a big community that's usually not a problem but for the small ones it is. If you have a hobby, then chances are its biggest lemmy community still doesn't see enough new activity to feel alive.
There is a noticeable lack of niche content though, so Redditors saying that aren't willing to see how the style of interactions on the Threadiverse is different.
Yeah but that's still an example of where we're at, though: niche subs rely on single committed users doing 99% of the posting to sustain enough activity.
There's nothing much to do about it at this stage though except try your best to be that user. We probably need to at least double our userbase for that to no longer be the case. Maybe more.
To be fair, we've got two committed users modding and submitting regularly now with a smattering of semi-regular post contributors and a good number of commenters.
Your point stands though, most of the comparable niche communities on reddit are far larger at least in user count.
It's just the 90-9-1 rule in effect. We're only at just under 60k MAUs. It's a great number and makes for decent activity in the larger subs but if 1% of those are regular posters that's... 600. That's not really enough to spread across niche interests, so it figures that most of them lack active subs.
Reddit shares that but fair has nothing to do with it: people are grandfathered into existing Reddit subs and for them to switch, they want it to be painless. Also, niche subs with fantastic mods are particularly where Reddit's toxicity problem is least apparent, as compared to coming to Lemmy and browsing by All. Otherwise new visitors go back to Reddit and complain in e.g. r/RedditAlternatives about what meanies we have over here... which is a true statement, as Lemmy was literally created by the same people who were kicked out of Reddit for being too toxic, and created this Reddit 2.0 (but decentralized, making it worthwhile).
Being told that e.g. having a bank account makes them equivalent to supporting genocide does NOT endear people to us. Take a look at Lemmy.ml, and/or hexbear.net, if you don't believe me - tbf there were far more of such BoTh SiDeS sAmE posts back prior to the USA election, and pretty much every election in a Western nation, but they still persist today. We are a Nazi bar here, by federating that conte
... show more
Plus there's a bit of a toxicity problem.
Reddit shares that but fair has nothing to do with it: people are grandfathered into existing Reddit subs and for them to switch, they want it to be painless. Also, niche subs with fantastic mods are particularly where Reddit's toxicity problem is least apparent, as compared to coming to Lemmy and browsing by All. Otherwise new visitors go back to Reddit and complain in e.g. r/RedditAlternatives about what meanies we have over here... which is a true statement, as Lemmy was literally created by the same people who were kicked out of Reddit for being too toxic, and created this Reddit 2.0 (but decentralized, making it worthwhile).
Being told that e.g. having a bank account makes them equivalent to supporting genocide does NOT endear people to us. Take a look at Lemmy.ml, and/or hexbear.net, if you don't believe me - tbf there were far more of such BoTh SiDeS sAmE posts back prior to the USA election, and pretty much every election in a Western nation, but they still persist today. We are a Nazi bar here, by federating that content everywhere. Also, the last time I checked out that join-lemmy website, it literally gave me the advice to join... wait for it... Hexbear.net, making even defederation from such instances as Lemmy.world insufficient so long as people are being told to come here via that website.
People do not enjoy being made fun of - should they though? - hence Lemmy will never gain a mainstream audience of non-technical users from the primarily centrist or even right-leaning userbases of Reddit or X/Twitter. We can be okay with that, or do something about it, but either way those are the options, not the middle ground of just hoping that people will ignore the trolling that is far too often allowed here.
I think having hexbear and .ml is a good thing, because those users are on those servers. They can be blocked (and properly on piefed :) ), so people who want to interact with them can, and those who don't, don't have to.
The thing I used to use Reddit for that I miss most is news on specific games I was interested in. If I wanted to actually post news about games, I would need to actively search for the news elsewhere (often times exclusively on Reddit) and regurgitate it here. This defeats the point of the me wanting the community or leaving Reddit in the first place.
Agreed. I have more than enough responses in political subs to be satisfied on Lemmy, without all the bullshit that makes up 3/4 of any political post on Reddit - bots, trolls, puns, Russian propaganda farmers, idiots, etc.
But i really miss the active guitar subs. Lemmy's go days or even months and years between posts. I'm so desperate, I'm starting to browse guitar forums on Facebook (gag!).
I honestly think that there is more direct activity here. I asked the same question on reddit in 3 different places, but had more replies here than there.
"I then used the script to spawn a Skimmer and put CJ inside it," writes Silent, "just to be launched 1.0287648030984853e+0031 = 10.3 nonillion meters, or 10.3 octillion kilometers, or 1.087 quadrillion light-years up in the sky."
The stratosphere extends from about 20km to 50km from the ground, whereas 1.087 quadrillion light-years equals approximately 9,460,700,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 km. I can be flexible, but that's just too much for an honest margin of error. So, which is it ?
Also I imagine GTA doesn’t model the planet, the solar system, the galaxy or the known universe, as this would put you well outside of the known universe.
I'm not sure if it's fast enough, but the Planck length does reemerge for everyone else at relativistic speeds, so using CJ as the frame of reference, there is a yeeting where he might "skip" the stratosphere like a rock being skipped across the pond.
I have contacted the editors at PCGamer to make it read "yeeted past the stratosphere". They have assured me that all involved will be leashed as punishment.
If we assume normal, real world physics at work, and we have to as the game surely doesn't model the stratosphere, he would not reach it even for a very very brief time as he'd have been evaporated from the heating at that speed well before getting to it.
Einer wie George Smiley war 2011 lange aus der Zeit gefallen. Und doch hat die behutsame Modernisierung dieses Spionageklassikers dem Veteranen des kalten Krieges gutgetan. Wo Alec Guinness seinerzeit (1979) noch mehr als fünf Stunden Zeit hatte, bekam Gary Oldman nur knapp zwei. Deshalb wurde aus der epischen Romanverfilmung aber kein Actionfilm. Es sind noch immer die Charaktere, welche die komplexe Handlung und Geschichte treiben. Und die großartigen Darsteller. (ARD)
Einer wie George Smiley war 2011 lange aus der Zeit gefallen. Und doch hat die behutsame Modernisierung dieses Spionageklassikers dem Veteranen des kalten…
Tre män åtalade för HA-mord i Lidköping. De har åtalats för inblandning i mordet på en tidigare Hells Angels-medlem i Lidköping våren 2022. De som ska ha utfört mordet är dock inte åtalade då de inte kunna identifieras.
Polisregion Östs hantering i samband med att två pojkar försvann 2023 har uppmärksammat i media under den senaste tiden. Detta med anledning av polisens nonchalans och öppna rasism när de skulle ta emot anmälan. Justitieombudsmannen (JO) har nu tagit beslutet att granska ärendet.
OTTAWA — NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh pledged today that New Democrats will fight to stop Mark Carney’s Liberals from pushing through $28 billion or more in cuts to health care and social programs.
), yet unlike corporate enshittified Reddit is worth it. Breathe the free air here!
Rivalarrival
Unknown parent • • •No, that conclusion does not follow from the facts at hand. There are any number of issues that raise my ire. I've railed just as vociferously against Hogg for guns as I have against any number of democratic fossils, for reasons ranging from pro-genocide, to appeasing Republicans, to senility. Gun control is just one of many disqualifying conditions. That he and I share an absolute disgust for Retired-in-Place Democrats is not sufficient to rehabilitate his image. He is an honorary fossil, and needs to go along with them.
Ensign_Crab
Unknown parent • • •Provided that the person calling for it has the opinions you prefer on guns. And only guns.
Rivalarrival
Unknown parent • • •I don't know if you didn't get the memo or something, but the left likes guns now. Gun control is not "moving the party to the left". Gun control is a plank in the old, establishment platform, and needs to be thrown out along with those ancient fossils.
Nobody gives a shit about the incumbent positions on anything, with the possible exception of their retirement. Get them the hell out of office, and bring in some actual leftists.
Ensign_Crab
Unknown parent • • •As always, there's some excuse for why the person who is trying to move the party to the left shouldn't be doing that.
It's neat watching the party go from "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good! It's just a little genocide!" to "This guy who is primarying centrists who hold us all back doesn't agree with republicans enough!"
Of all of the people in this thread for whom the second amendment fills the void where a personality would be in a more complete person, not one cares about the incumbents' opinions on firearms.
Rivalarrival
Unknown parent • • •I agree, we do need a "Guillotine Party" to do for us what the Tea Party did for the GOP.
Unfortunately, Hogg and gun control are part of what needs to be removed.
Rivalarrival
Unknown parent • • •You and David Hogg are Democrats, despite your irrational, centrist support for gun control. I'm apparently Wayne LaPierre because I oppose it.
One of us is using gun control as a purity test. The other is not.
Ensign_Crab
Unknown parent • • •No, you just decided to start.
Rivalarrival
Unknown parent • • •Ensign_Crab
Unknown parent • • •Until just now, when centrist control of the party is threatened.
Rivalarrival
Unknown parent • • •No part of my comment history suggests I have ever supported Wayne LaPierre.
You and I probably agree on 99% of the issues, but you're willing to alienate me on the basis of this particular, obviously divisive issue.
You are not alone in this. The party has long used gun control as a purity test, rejecting candidates (and alienating voters) who offer anything less than full-throated support for gun control.
But that purity test is one of the things that needs to be excised from the party.
Gun control does not have the broad support it did in the 90's. The wave of concealed carry adoption in the late 90's/ early 2000's has radically expanded the number and political diversity of gun owners across the country. The party has thus far failed to recognize this shift in the political climate. We can see the results.
Ensign_Crab
Unknown parent • • •Because you don't like that he's not Wayne LaPierre?
Rivalarrival
Unknown parent • • •Again, "gun control" is not a leftist issue. Gun control is keeping the party from moving left.
Further, Hogg isn't trying to move the party to the left. He openly supports legacy Democrats like Pelosi and Hillary who built the failed party, and he is looking for younger candidates who will keep the party right where theose decrepit fossils planted it.
Ensign_Crab
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •Just seems like whenever there's someone who is trying to get the party to move to the left, suddenly there's some criterion for why they shouldn't.
Bernie's too old and that was a problem from 2016 until the second Biden announced. It's a problem again now that Biden is out of office. AOC is a woman and that's suddenly a problem because she's seizing the moment. Hogg doesn't agree with the NRA on guns.
There's always some excuse.
Ad Blocker 117
in reply to MicroWave • • •CalipherJones
in reply to Ad Blocker 117 • • •Vandals_handle
in reply to CalipherJones • • •dukeofdummies
in reply to CalipherJones • • •Ensign_Crab
in reply to Ad Blocker 117 • • •ShaggySnacks
in reply to Ensign_Crab • • •Eugene V. Debs' Ghost
in reply to Ensign_Crab • • •Might as well make a bet if the sun will rise tomorrow.
If they fought against fascists like they do to progressives, Trump wouldn't have had any chance at even the nomination in 2016.
Ensign_Crab
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •You want nothing to do with Hogg or his push to primary useless incumbents. And your only stated reason is because he's not pro-school-shooting enough.
Sounds like a purity test to me.
TronBronson
Unknown parent • • •Rivalarrival
in reply to Ensign_Crab • • •Nah, he's still a Democrat, even though his position conflicts with the electorate. As are you.
The "test" here isn't one of purity. Here, the test is whether he can represent that electorate. He can't.
His position on gun control is the most obvious example, but it's not the only one. He idolizes Pelosi and Clinton, and wants to replace "useless incumbents" with Baby Nancy and Baby Hillary.
Ileftreddit
in reply to MicroWave • • •TronBronson
in reply to Ileftreddit • • •???? Really you think that's what the donors think when they send money to the DNC????
"Here's my hard earned money please do what ever the fuck you want with it, efficacy be damned"
That actually explains a lot tbh. You might be on to something here!
Ensign_Crab
in reply to TronBronson • • •I mean, that's the response they expect from progressives.
TronBronson
in reply to Ensign_Crab • • •Gates9
in reply to MicroWave • • •Mistake for who? Not a mistake for me, not a mistake tactically considering the policy and popularity polling, not a mistake when you consider that these people have been suppressing popular and well polling progressive policies and candidates for decades and still managed to lose the presidency and both houses to a goddamn moron…
All of this shit, all of these “reasons” they list in opposition to Hogg’s initiative, they are all bullshit. Bullshit and deflections and distractions from the fact that they are concerned exclusively about the bottom line for their wealthy benefactors, and about their own as well. The irony that is not lost on anyone is that they are the assholes who did this to us in the first place, and would you look at that, Donald Trump is about to hand them a tax cut.
KittyCat
in reply to Gates9 • • •TronBronson
in reply to KittyCat • • •KittyCat
in reply to TronBronson • • •TronBronson
in reply to KittyCat • • •Ensign_Crab
in reply to KittyCat • • •but here comes the excuse...
How convenient!
KittyCat
in reply to Ensign_Crab • • •YiddishMcSquidish
in reply to MicroWave • • •TronBronson
in reply to YiddishMcSquidish • • •YiddishMcSquidish
in reply to TronBronson • • •TronBronson
in reply to YiddishMcSquidish • • •YiddishMcSquidish
in reply to TronBronson • • •Why was Elon musk allowed to spend a quarter billion Billion BILLION dollars on a single state's supreme Court judge's race.
I think you need to stare into this🪞 for a little longer than a little while.
TronBronson
in reply to YiddishMcSquidish • • •Well that's a great point! I thought about it, and I did some research on how the DNC selects its members. I concluded that the DNC itself is an elitist organization that does nothing but provide fake opposition to a real problem with the republicans. I find that the institution itself flys in the face of fair represenation. I've really felt that way since 2016 when they didn't let Bernie take the nomination. But now I'm extra irate. and as i sit here staring at a child who is going to be determining the parties future I have real questions and concerns.
You have snarky answers and downvotes. You got a real address to my criticism or did I lose you somewhere and this is all I will get?
YiddishMcSquidish
in reply to TronBronson • • •TronBronson
in reply to YiddishMcSquidish • • •I looked in the mirror and what i saw was just another question. Why couldn't the DNC find a candidate to beat Trump or Mitch McConell or any other psychopath entrenched in office for 30+ years? Why is the DNC's messaging and strategy so bad that they can lose an election to a deranged tyrant... twice.
Either way I looked in the future mirror and you're starving in a camp in El Salvador, or maybe starving at your house. It's the ghost of this christmas future. Have fun when supply chains collapse and your can't exchange your money for food buddy!
TronBronson
Unknown parent • • •givesomefucks
in reply to MicroWave • • •The issue is we get majorities and then nothing gets done with depresses turnout.
We don't want to primary these old conservatives, we'd much rather them represent their constituents, but they've shown time and time again they won't.
We'd rather they get out of the way and resign, but they won't put the future of the party over their own personal power.
So fuck em.
paultimate14
in reply to givesomefucks • • •I agree about "fuck em", let's get out with the old and in with the new.
But what majorities are you talking about? I keep seeing this repeated all over the internet- the sentiment that Democrats get nothing done when they have control. The problem is that I'm 33 years old and the Dems have only had control of the federal government for a few months of my life, and that's when they passed the ACA. I can't really make a judgement on what the Dems do when they're in power because they largely have not been.
eldavi
in reply to paultimate14 • • •you owe it yourself to read up on american political history and; if you did; you would learn that every time they've had control of all 3 branches of government; they've squandered it by letting a one or 2 democrats derail all of their plans, meanwhile republicans steamroll over their own dissenters every time they're in control.
you'd start to see that this pattern keeps happening again and again.
paultimate14
in reply to eldavi • • •What times are these?
As I said, they have only had control for 4 months in my lifetime. Before that you need to go back to 1961-1969 with Kennedy and Johnson. I would actually need to do more research to find out whether they had a Supermajority or not, but it's not even worth looking up because going that far back in time shifts the politics of the parties significantly and is not very relevant to today. The Democratic Party still has plenty of Southern Conservatives all the way into the Carter years.
So I would love to know what pattern you are seeing.
eldavi
in reply to paultimate14 • • •democrats had full control from 1993–1995, 2009–2011, 2021–2023 and majority control from 2011-2015 & 2023-2024. in other words: 12 years of complete or majority control out of the last 33 years.
every single time their agenda was thwarted by one or two lone dissenters within their caucuses; where republicans completely steamrolled over their own dissenters.
paultimate14
in reply to eldavi • • •bitjunkie
in reply to paultimate14 • • •paultimate14
in reply to bitjunkie • • •eldavi
in reply to paultimate14 • • •have you ever wondered why republicans don't need a super-majorities or why dems give a rats ass about dino where republicans dont every-single-time?
is that not the definition of a rigged game?
SSNs4evr
in reply to MicroWave • • •Ledericas
in reply to SSNs4evr • • •ShaggySnacks
in reply to Ledericas • • •Ledericas
in reply to ShaggySnacks • • •slappypantsgo
in reply to SSNs4evr • • •SSNs4evr
in reply to slappypantsgo • • •slappypantsgo
in reply to SSNs4evr • • •HelixDab2
in reply to MicroWave • • •I agree with the older Dems, but not for their reasons.
No, we should not support the candidates that Hogg supports. Because Hogg is very opposed to 2A rights, and ipso facto any candidate that he supports will also be opposed to 2A rights. And if you think that we're gonna just vote our way out of this, I've got some very, very bad news for you.
Primary the old fucks with young leftists (hopefully ones that actually understand economics and tax policy)? Absolutely! Primary them with ones that ideologically aligned with Hogg? No.
TronBronson
in reply to HelixDab2 • • •Daggity
in reply to TronBronson • • •TronBronson
in reply to Daggity • • •lolcatnip
in reply to TronBronson • • •TronBronson
in reply to lolcatnip • • •lolcatnip
in reply to TronBronson • • •HelixDab2
in reply to TronBronson • • •There's a big problem with that.
Right now, the majority of people in the US are in favor of deporting all undocumented immigrants. Right now, the overwhelming majority of people are opposed to transgender rights (e.g., using bathrooms that correspond to their gender, participating in sports, having access to gender-affirming care, and so on). Going back to the late 80s/early 90s, most people would not have believed that Satanists had the right to free exercise of their religion (and many people still don't today). If you go back 75 years, the majority of the country believed that 'separate but equal' was entirely reasonable; sure, let those negroes have rights, but letting them live in our neighborhoods, go to our schools, get married to our women...? Absolutely not!
This is what is referred to as "the tyranny of the majority".
The whole purpose of the bill of rights is that they are RIGHTS, and not intended to be something that is up for a popular vote. All gun control is intended to prevent people from exercising their right to keep and bear arms.
TronBronson
in reply to HelixDab2 • • •You’re going to have to share your data because it conflicts with mine. I don’t think you understand what a majority is. Technically it would be 175 million people to form a majority in the USA. We live in an oligarchy, that’s tyranny of the majority by a minority. A majority of Americans do not vote.
A majority of the people in the US are probably unaware of the recent deportations. A majority of us lack reading comprehension skills above the 6th grade level. A majority of us don’t understand the 3 branches of government. I can share my data, but I’d like to see yours first
HelixDab2
in reply to TronBronson • • •Where Americans stand on 20 transgender policy issues
Taylor Orth (YouGov)Hacksaw
in reply to HelixDab2 • • •HelixDab2
in reply to Hacksaw • • •gravitas_deficiency
in reply to MicroWave • • •JaggedRobotPubes
in reply to gravitas_deficiency • • •Those laws wouldn't get passed until this whole thing is over and there are progressives in office able to actually do things, if that happens. You wouldn't have gun control as the law of the land in two months. And guns need to take a massive fucking back seat in America. No more blood cult shit, because that's what it is.
Go for what you actually want, which is freedom. Freedom is when you aren't surrounded by people with guns.
SabinStargem
in reply to JaggedRobotPubes • • •Madzielle
in reply to gravitas_deficiency • • •gravitas_deficiency
in reply to Madzielle • • •So like… I was in my early thirties when this happened. I know. I remember. I watched some of the news livestreams as it went down.
I said what I said understanding that.
I am by no means trying to diminish, demean, discredit, disparage, or otherwise detract from his experience. Im saying that I am very fucking concerned that an actual war is coming, and disarming right before a war is a great fucking way to get killed.
lolcatnip
in reply to gravitas_deficiency • • •pulsewidth
in reply to gravitas_deficiency • • •Gun control means: mandatory background checks, waiting periods, bans on previously convicted violent criminals owning guns, potentially magazine limits or limits on fully automatic licenses to specific users (like you may need to demonstrate you have proficiency and be a member of a gun club). None of this goes against "the right to bear arms".
It does not mean nobody can buy guns or that guns are taken away - this is the fearmongering always pushed by the very conservative, very pro-Trump NRA.
Rivalarrival
in reply to pulsewidth • • •We agree on what "gun control" means. We do not agree on the need for gun control, nor do we agree on the affects of gun control on the right to keep and bear arms.
That means forced to go to an FFL dealer before trading guns with your friends and neighbors. No private sales, even to trusted parties. Unacceptable. Every legitimate purpose that a mandatory background check provides can be accomplished by creating public access to NICS. With that in place, every seller can know, and so is expected to know their buyer's status. But, "public access to NICS" is not part of our shared definition of "gun control", and has been fervently opposed by Democratic leadership every time it has been proposed.
... show moreEven in theory, waiting periods can only achieve their intent with first-time gun buyers. For everyone else, they serve no purpose other than to hassle gun owners. You could theoretically walk in to a gun store with an AR15 hanging from your chest, a Remington 870 over yo
We agree on what "gun control" means. We do not agree on the need for gun control, nor do we agree on the affects of gun control on the right to keep and bear arms.
That means forced to go to an FFL dealer before trading guns with your friends and neighbors. No private sales, even to trusted parties. Unacceptable. Every legitimate purpose that a mandatory background check provides can be accomplished by creating public access to NICS. With that in place, every seller can know, and so is expected to know their buyer's status. But, "public access to NICS" is not part of our shared definition of "gun control", and has been fervently opposed by Democratic leadership every time it has been proposed.
Even in theory, waiting periods can only achieve their intent with first-time gun buyers. For everyone else, they serve no purpose other than to hassle gun owners. You could theoretically walk in to a gun store with an AR15 hanging from your chest, a Remington 870 over your shoulder, a S&W 500 holstered on your waist, a 1911 on your hip, a Glock 26 on your ankle, and an LCP in your pocket. But, while you're walking around with three defensive pistols, a big game handgun, a shotgun, and an intermediate caliber rifle, the clerk at that gun store won't let you leave with a bolt-action .22LR plinker. Suffice it to say, waiting periods are unacceptable.
The only reason to even mention such bans is to deceive people into thinking they don't already exist. They do. That deceit is completely unacceptable.
The usual limits proposed are 6 or 10 rounds. These numbers are not derived from any studies on defensive need. They do not consider whether 6 to 10 rounds is sufficient to stop a deadly threat. They do not consider multiple attackers. Unacceptable. The various proposals often apply to guns that can accept such magazines, rather than the magazines themselves, and would thus make most existing guns illegal. Only firearms with fixed magazines could comply with such laws. Unacceptable.
Fully automatic firearms, suppressors, SBRs and SBSs are already overburdened with excessive licensing restrictions. Unacceptable.
Harassing gun owners with these ridiculous gun control measures is costing elections. David Hogg was brought to the DNC by the inept leadership to support their losing message on gun control. He and his pet issue are part of what the Guillotine Party needs to excise.
pulsewidth
in reply to Rivalarrival • • •The USA is alone in the entire world in that it has a mass shooting almost every day of every year, and yet when faced with modest controla you're like, "if I, a citizen with no gun dealer licensr can't just sell whatever guns whenever I like to neighbours and friends then any changes are unacceptable".
You say pro gun-control candidates will cost the Democrats votes, well I think I just found a single issue voter.
Rivalarrival
in reply to pulsewidth • • •It's not my vote you need to worry about. I voted for Harris, Biden, Clinton, Obama, Obama, Kerry, Gore, and more Democratic governors, legislators, judges, commissioners, and administrators than I feel like counting. Democrats didn't, and won't lose my vote over gun control.
The votes you should be concerned about are the ones who aren't here, arguing with you. The votes you should be concerned about are the ones that turned former bellwether swing states into reliably red states. Ohio for example. A state that voted for the eventual winner in 36 of the last 41 elections, going back all the way to the civil war. A state that is now considered reliably red.
Democrats did nothing to prepare for the kids and grandkids of the first generation of concealed carriers across the country. Kids who now have their own carry licenses. The Democrats never bothered to consider the effects of 30 milli
... show moreIt's not my vote you need to worry about. I voted for Harris, Biden, Clinton, Obama, Obama, Kerry, Gore, and more Democratic governors, legislators, judges, commissioners, and administrators than I feel like counting. Democrats didn't, and won't lose my vote over gun control.
The votes you should be concerned about are the ones who aren't here, arguing with you. The votes you should be concerned about are the ones that turned former bellwether swing states into reliably red states. Ohio for example. A state that voted for the eventual winner in 36 of the last 41 elections, going back all the way to the civil war. A state that is now considered reliably red.
Democrats did nothing to prepare for the kids and grandkids of the first generation of concealed carriers across the country. Kids who now have their own carry licenses. The Democrats never bothered to consider the effects of 30 million new gun licensees in 42 of the 50 states, nor their families and friends. Never bothered to consider that voter opinion on guns might have shifted since the civil rights era.
Gun control is one of the more prominent issues of dissatisfaction with the Democratic party.
crusa187
in reply to MicroWave • • •If it has to be democrats instead of a new party, this is literally the only way to make it work.
Good Job David Hogg and Leaders We Deserve, hope you oust a ton of these ancient shitbirds.
givesomefucks
in reply to crusa187 • • •The neoliberals no longer have the chair....
Ken Martin does...
And the same DNC voters who elected him, elected David Hogg as a vice chair...
Like, this is the party.
Why would we push for a new one, when we just got control of the old one after decades?
VasovagalSyncope
in reply to givesomefucks • • •We're not doing another 2016
We can have leftist leadership or admit we want a fascist dictatorship.
The DNC have had over 50 years to choose to force their rich doners to make concessions. They've shown they aren't interested.
The Neoliberals don't get to be in charge anymore.
givesomefucks
in reply to VasovagalSyncope • • •They're literally not tho...
Like, the battles were fought, the war was won...
You just don't seem to be politically engaged enough to have noticed.
VasovagalSyncope
in reply to givesomefucks • • •givesomefucks
in reply to VasovagalSyncope • • •You're blaming the people elected to DNC leadership of February 2025 for things done in November of 2024 and earlier....
Why?
VasovagalSyncope
in reply to givesomefucks • • •Why am i blaming a party that is totally incapable of representing their voters?
Because this is supposed to be a democracy?
givesomefucks
in reply to VasovagalSyncope • • •A_Random_Idiot
in reply to MicroWave • • •supersquirrel
in reply to MicroWave • • •Where was the outrage when AIPAC dropped money bombs on progressive primaries to silence opposition against Israel and the Genocide of Palestinians?
The DNC is dead to most USians, the party leadership just refuses to acknowledge it even when their candidates and strategies lose to literal outright fascists.
No, this is the bare minimum I will accept in order to not consider the DNC my enemy.
Burn it down.
Also, age isn't the problem, the problem is money and a rigid party ideology.
Eugene V. Debs' Ghost
in reply to supersquirrel • • •Well when people called it out, Reddit and Lemmy said anyone who saw this was:
If you look at the lemmy.world modlog, so many people calling out this were removed and banned, and then the userbase acted dumbfounded when the legitimate users were "quiet" after being banned, so it verified their bias of "everyone who disagrees with what my favorite political tells me is a bot/troll".
supersquirrel
in reply to Eugene V. Debs' Ghost • • •I agree, I lost a huge amount of respect for the people running and moderating lemmy.world after dealing with their reactions to people simply upset that a genocide is happening.
I had an interaction with one of their mods and it was very disappointing to see them so confidently on the side of silencing voices speaking up about genocide.
Sometimes I get the feeling lemmy.world is run by a bunch of centrists who's hobby it is to undermine leftism because they are afraid of leftwing beliefs exactly the way pathetic conservatives are, and it makes it hard to take the entire community seriously.
Some of the prominent very active low effort posters like Pugjesus have absolutely trash views when you actually get into a conversation about their beliefs.
Eugene V. Debs' Ghost
in reply to supersquirrel • • •Was it JeffW or JordanLund? Both of those dudes can't help defend genocide. Especially JL, he openly hates Black Lives Matter.
And they call us the Russian Psyop/bot. I've had so many people say things like "I'm a leftist, but [defending the most conservative positions possible]." At least .ml is honest in their intentions.
... show moreAnd he's so fucking smug! He will defend his trash opinions, say he's the smartest
Was it JeffW or JordanLund? Both of those dudes can't help defend genocide. Especially JL, he openly hates Black Lives Matter.
And they call us the Russian Psyop/bot. I've had so many people say things like "I'm a leftist, but [defending the most conservative positions possible]." At least .ml is honest in their intentions.
And he's so fucking smug! He will defend his trash opinions, say he's the smartest one in the room, and then act like he's the victim when he says something like "I don't think you should ally with these people when ICE comes knocking" or "I don't have to respect the pronouns of people I don't like."
Lemmy.world is a majority of my blocklist. I like a handful of users from it. But the mods and admins have cultivated a inverted MAGA mentalitt around themselves. Anytime you critize their favorite thing, you'll be banned and blocked. And then they claim it's evil when .ml does the exact same thing.
Keeponstalin
in reply to Eugene V. Debs' Ghost • • •On top of everything above, the snark against any criticism of us foreign policy, the DNC, or neo/liberalism has been getting really gross. Completely overriding any genuine discussions or nuance about the topics.
I got perma banned by pugjesus on one of his comms for defending the blowback podcast and the journalists who created it
I'm definitely thinking about switching instances
Eugene V. Debs' Ghost
in reply to Keeponstalin • • •pjwestin
in reply to MicroWave • • •There are currently 2 vacant seats in Congress, which won't be filled until the fall, left empty by Democrats who died in office. We're not going to restore majorities by electing people who keep dropping dead.
Bakkoda
in reply to MicroWave • • •DNC: We need older candidates.
They are so good at messaging.
givesomefucks
in reply to Bakkoda • • •David Hogg is literally a vice chair of the DNC and has the backing of the chair in saying this...
You're literally commenting on the DNC doing what you want and saying they're doing the opposite
Bakkoda
in reply to givesomefucks • • •