1485
Twitter's filters for anybody out of the loop
(slrpnk.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2025
1485 points (98.5% liked)
People Twitter
10399 readers
1358 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major celebrity, figure or any politician. You can replace the addres of .x.com to xcancel.com in the address. https://web.archive.org/save is an option. Archive.is is no longer recommended because they remove/alter content.
- If a tweet (or similar) makes a statement of fact, either mark it as "satire" in the body or provide the original source link backing up the statement (see rule 6)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
IDK How to tell you this, but fascist racists own everything and are planning to kill a whole bunch of people soon. I really think people are under estimating the severity of the vision these people have for the world.
Can you quantify soon here? I agree with you that they don't have good intentions, but I think that framing it as like, a planned genocide is not accurate. More realistically what can happen is more systemic injustices and consolidations of power to prevent anyone from resisting.
To start with, their plan for mass deportation probably already counts as a displacement genocide. There will be thousands of deaths from it leaving aside everything else wrong with it.
There are also approximately 3 million trans people in the US. Every single one of them is in danger as the fascists' chosen scapegoat.
Why do you think that?
Rwandan genocide? The Holocaust? Israeli's war on Palestinian. Armenian genocide? US chattel slavery? Tulsa Race Massacre? China and how they threat neighbors? South African Apartheid?
Naming genocides that happen doesn't make the previous statement any more true.
History, and a soupçon of paranoia
Soupçon: A very small amount; a hint; a trace, slight idea; an inkling.
Thank you for the new word, I like it.
I was thinking it was soup can for a moment. Then I realized the C had it's pants down and it dawned on me that it was a French word.
more like a soup ladle am I right
Not much of a news junkie are you?
If you don't couch this a whole lot, it undermines the seriousness of what is actually about to happen.
Anything less than tens of millions dead falls short of your comment. And that's likely not the reality.
Trans people, the group currently most targeted for elimination by the right, represent about 1% of the US population. Jewish people in pre-Nazi Germany also represented about 1% of the population.
When Republicans past eliminationist laws meant to persecute trans people, deny them from public life, and kill them by taking away their healthcare, they are committing crimes of the same order as what Germany did in the 1930s.
That is simple historical by-the-numbers truth.
The chilling thing for me is that Nazi Germany was able to accomplish this without the technology and mass surveillance we have today.
It will be a slow boil and they'll arrest people one at a time for "terrorism" and such. I won't be surprised to see extremist militias going after people as well.
They won't even need to use terrorism. Right in Project 2025 is a plan to slowly classify any public existence or acknowledgement of LGBT identities as "pornographic." And in turn classify showing "pornography" to children is pedophilia and worthy of being put on the sex offender registry. They want to make it so if say, a trans woman, goes out in public and a child sees her, then that is the equivalent of grooming an 8 year old child by showing them pornographic videos. Oh, and they also want to attach the death penalty to crimes of pedophilia.
I didn't see how that will massively backfire on them at all.
You're assuming the law will be applied consistently.
1% is 3.8 million people. They'll likely be ostracized, forced into hiding, and we all know the effects of that.
We're both describing terrible things, terrible things that are short of hunting people down and loading them into trains.
Your comparison does a disservice to everyone. Setting the bar at the damn holocaust gives our opponents an easy out. "They act like we're", "we're just", are the natural, easy responses.
Don't give them easy outs. Things can be less terrible than the actual Holocaust and still be terrible.
They're talking about rounding up 20 million people and deporting them. Do you really think you can do that without setting up massive camps that match or exceed the scale of anything the Nazis set up? And if you really want to move that many people around, you may end up having to use trains.
Oh, and worse, they have no plan on how to actually deport that many people. The Nazis originally planned to deport all the Jews as well. Yet they quickly found that there simply weren't enough nations willing to accept all these deportees. Other countries aren't obligated to accept your deportees.
So you now have millions of people in camps, costing a fortune to maintain, and no where to send these people. That always ends in slavery, death, or death by slavery. Whenever your plan starts with "round up tens of millions of people and put them in camps," you can guarantee that a massive death toll is going to follow.
And I think your comment here is a hell of a lot more valuable than starting out with "IDK How to tell you this, but fascist racists own everything and are planning to kill a whole bunch of people soon."
You can't just skip to the end of the worst case scenario without people blowing you off. I mostly agree with you; I just think that particular messaging is damaging.
I think starting off so dismissive until later in the thread makes it seem very much like you don't mostly agree and is more damaging to the idea
Maybe I'm unusual here, but if I saw 200 corpses in a big pile, I would think that someone killed a whole bunch of people.
To your point, it's funny how we frame things depending on the circumstances.
Growing up I always thought the Saint Valentine's Day Massacre was some huge slaughter where hundreds of people died. Turns out it was seven people. Mobsters, actually, so it could be argued it was "gang violence", but still. Seven people executed by a rival gang, and it's a massacre.
At least 37 die, over 800 injured, and over 10000 were left homeless, but Tulsa ignored it for decades, then called it a,,"race riot".
Twenty children and six adults are murdered by a nutter and it's still not a massacre, but at least it's "tragic", which is a step up from the average school shooting, which is normally called "Tuesday".
Over 45,000 Afghan civilians died from 2001-2021, but that's not a massacre, just collateral damage.
But that's over twenty years, of course that's not a massacre, plus they're, you know, foreign. Now if 45,000 Americans died in one year, well, that would be different. Except they do, but because they lack insurance coverage. So, you know, that's their fault for dying of preventable illnesses on account of being poor. That's not a massacre, just good business.
But one CEO is murdered and it's a tragedy again
And when Israel kills that many Palestinians in one year, college kids get arrested for protesting it while Congress jacks off while rubberstamping another $10 billion of arms sales to Bibi.
Is the holocaust really your measurement for the meaning of "killing a bunch of people?" I don't think things have to get all that bad to be justified in saying "a bunch of people died."
When you look into where contemporary right wing ideologies comes from, and what journalists are reporting on in online right wing spaces, a holocaust doesn't seem out of the question. The Turner Diaries is worth looking into. Robert Evans is also a pretty informed journalist on the matter.
What are you guys talking about?
Stop downvoting and tel what they are talking about lol