this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2024
1575 points (95.7% liked)
AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND
597 readers
129 users here now
This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.
♦ ♦ ♦
RULES
① Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.
② Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.
③ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.
④ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.
⑤ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.
Please also abide by the instance rules.
♦ ♦ ♦
Can't get enough? Visit my blog.
♦ ♦ ♦
Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.
$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Who is actually saying this tho?
I believe the rationale is that if you vote for a candidate who says they're going to reduce civil rights for people, then you also believe that those people should have their rights reduced. So I think they mean "by voting for the Civil Rights Reduction Party, you're effectively saying you want these people's rights to be reduced, whether or not you intend to."
But that's just my interpretation, I could be wrong.
I think that about sums it up, no?
You see similar things often with “conservative” losers who decry that women don’t want to date them. So, they lie about their political ideas on dating sites etc and call themselves “moderate” or “independent” and then get upset when they reveal they “like Trump” or some idiocy like that and their dates are turned off.
No one is, unless they are truly mad. These statements are often based on other commentary, pigeonholing individuals into specific categories, like only having two viewpoints, Blue or Red. But life isn't so black and white. We all desire the same things like peace, security, economic stability, fairness, etc. Each side believes they have the solution, but in reality, neither does. The media manipulates the people into fighting with one other. Stop being sheep and fighting over scraps.
Stop with your enlightened centrist bullshit. This isn't a solution to "peace", "security", "economic stability" nor "fairness".
We are in agreement. I said neither side has the answers. The global elite will not allow the true solution to any of those things. They only want to retain power and occupy the world.
The problem is that one of the sides is the one that doesn't want those things. And are you talking about the bourgeoisie when you say the global elite?
No, it's not one side wants evil and one side wants good, that's sheep think and exactly what the global elite want. The global elite do not show their face and they control the narrative. They have all their subordinates do all the dirty work so they don't have to take the heat. The bourgeoisie aren't the 'The social class between the lower and upper classes', they are the 1% of the 1% that control the world. Wake up.
"Global elite" is a frequent code word used by anti-Semites, and it means 'Jews'. As this is the 4th time you've used that phrase in this group, where it had never been used before, I'm asking: What exactly are you talking about when you say 'global elite'?
Global, meaning the people in control who live throughout the entire globe. Nothing to do with race or nationality. Simply the ones in power who don't reveal themselves and have others carry out their plan.
Thanks. Can't particularly disagree with that.
Yeah it's like when Republicans say "Democrats want to kill babies". You're misinterpreting your political opponent in the least charitable way possible. I'm not a conservative at all, but when dealing with people who are different than you, you need to assume good faith. There is a core of conservative Trump supporters who really are just selfish assholes, but most people-yes, including people whos political views you find immoral and repugnant-are fundamentally good.
That doesn't mean they're right! But I don't see why I can't be friends with somebody who has looked at very complex moral issues like abortion, religion, and equality and come to different conclusions than me.
This is drivel. I don't have to pretend that someone who is actively working to oppress others is "fundamentally good".
You can be friends with people who have harmful views all you want. But you're complicit.
Hmmmmm.
Do you support abortion? Do you think that Nazis should have some restrictions on their free speech? Do you oppose prayer being led by teachers in public schools? Do you support gun control?
If yes to any of the above, a political opponent could easily say that you in fact are actively working to oppress others and that your views are harmful. To which Im sure you would reply that no, those stances are about protecting and empowering people, but thats really a matter of perspective and conservatives would say the same thing about their principles. I'm sorry that this makes me sound like a smug enlightened centrist, cause I'm not remotely a centrist, but I think it's narrow-minded to believe that only people with your worldview are fundamentally good.
My dude, one of the candidates is a proven rapist. Are you going to try and tell me that "rape is bad" is "just a matter of perspective"?
To be quite frank, some perspectives are simply bad and/or evil and don't merit respect or consideration. If that alienates shitty and evil people, then good.
Do I believe rape is bad? Of course, and I believe the accusations and therefore I believe Trump is a bad person. But the vast majority of his supporters don't believe the accusations, so it's not fair to accuse them of knowingly supporting a rapist. Honest question, do you really believe 40% of the US population is shitty and evil?
I believe anyone that supports Trump at this point, with the amount of information we possess regarding his various crimes and veritable dump truck of unethical and immoral behaviour to be either an idiot or a terrible person, yes.
People that want him in office for tax breaks or other economical advantages, civil rights and the greater economy as a whole be damned, can at least be reasoned with. Their motivations are selfish and terrible, but there is room for negotiation there, however unsavoury it may seem.
The terminally stupid or the plainly evil bigots on the other hand have no value and I see no reason to grant them any consideration.
Exactly! But what worries me is that I am beginning to see a lack of this exact understanding more and more. On both sides equally lately too.
I have been labeled a trump supporter for not agreeing with a specific thing. I have been labeled a "kamala communist" all that stuff, for the same in the reverse. I have been banned for hate speech for saying "Yeah this is my field of study, we dont actually do this - it would be dangerous - that is just something you hear politically active" - literally in an "Give me an alternate opinion" subreddit.
It's just like that little short film "Kill All Others" - I am being mistaken for being in the opposite side when really I have not picked a side. This ostracization is becoming more common. Hyperpoliticalization.
Couldn't agree more. I have been called everything from a leftist shill to an NPC to a bootlicker, depending on whether I am trying to engage with someone to the left or right of me. It's a little frustrating... I wouldn't even say that I haven't picked a side- I absolutely do have political stances, and I'm pretty far left overall, but that doesn't stop people farther left than me of accusing me of being in bed with the fascists/"part of the problem"