this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2023
1041 points (97.4% liked)
worldnews
4839 readers
1 users here now
Rules:
-
Be civil. Disagreements happen, that does not give you the right to personally insult each other.
-
No racism or bigotry.
-
Posts from sources that aren't known to be incredibly biased for either side of the spectrum are preferred. If this is not an option, you may post from whatever source you have as long as it is relevant to this community.
-
Post titles should be the same as the article title.
-
No spam, self-promotion, or trolling.
Instance-wide rules always apply.
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
It's maddening to watch all of the progress made around the world getting pushed back for no good reason aside from making a minority of the population uncomfortable—with their beliefs being based on lies and misinformation.
Edited to reword for clarity.
It's the last desperate lashing out of the old beast.
People have been saying the "last so and so" or the death roll, or the movement is dying out by attrition. I just wish I had your optimism. I mean I did, but as I grew (in 40s now), I noticed that the numbers don't matter when you have power and a plan. Just keep your opposition from organizing properly by controlling the message and manufacturing outrage for the supporters to talk about instead of actually problems. The media sells their story to make money and also distract from the real problems (their owners).
Did the average person hear about the Senate hearings during covid? The oil execs that stated their board of directors only care about making record breaking profits during the pandemc, instead of trying to alleviate the burden on the general population. They probably wanted a yacht for their yacht. Can't let a good opportunity to make money go to waste. It's actually against the CEOs fiduciary obligation to the board to not make as much money as possible. Even if they have to factor in payouts for a faulty product that kills someone the life cost doesn't matter, legal, the only obligation is fiduciary.
Sure we have the "numbers," but the numbers don't matter too much when the system is set up to be run by a smaller group of people that just have to keep others out and confuse the majority by making news harder to shift through.
I certainly hope we're seeing it dying. It will never completely go away, but we can hope it dwindles to the point where it has no power.
The thing is, they are only uncomfortable with it because some fascist politician is telling them to be uncomfortable with it. I am a same-sex married person with children. When people are face-to-face with a regular person like myself who happens to be married to someone of the same gender and has kids, most people actually have very little problem with it. But then some politician feeds them lies, lies that are then propagated on Facebook or Twitter, and suddenly they have an issue with the concept.
What is happening in Italy terrifies me. It's terrifying because it is the same slippery slope Russia went down and the same slippery slope we're heading down in the USA. We're watching it happen in real time with kids who are transgender. The GOP is not stopping there. They have already shown they are a full-on fascists. They will not stop until the USA is their authoritarian utopia.
This is EXACTLY my biggest worry and frustration. We are seeing a large group of people who think the way they are told to think and believe what they are told to believe. Unquestioningly.
These people cannot be reasoned with or educated when it comes to the subjects in question...
... except at the same time they're completely different when talking to individuals from the targeted groups face to face. I see it every day. For instance railing about something LGBTQ+ related from Faux Newz then greeting a friend and his husband 15 minutes later.
It's mind boggling: not just the behavior but the number of people who are so gullible.
Ribbit
Since the progressives and people who want redistribution of wealth, more regulation and bureaucracy, and for the state to take care of them are highly intersecting groups - I'd say they have made their bed and have to lie in it now.
It took just a little nudge, it seems, to make governments sufficiently insensitive and powerful again to start taking the rights one may consider secure, because it's other people being forced, not you, right?..
Sad but not surprised.
Still scary to see that it's Italy, not, you know, Hungary or Poland or at least Austria.
Love seeing the sheep who think that "progressives" are the problem will happily elect the assholes that expand government reach, take more of the peoples' money while simping for the rich, and work to screw the people the most in any other ways they can imagine.
People like you are the problem. It's just ridiculously easy to convince you simpletons it's not. Run on and piss off.
Everyone that wants the state to have more power over people's life, property and labor is to blame. You can't give power to a position that is selected through a popularity contest.
Your blind devotion to libertarian politics has prevented you from even understanding the issue we're all discussing. We're talking about a right wing government taking children away from their parents because of their sexual orientation. Progressives didn't vote for that.
Didn't you know that not wanting tainted food is exactly the same thing as supporting Mussolini?
Progressive or conservative, everyone was ok with giving the government powers to do this.
I won't. However I'm in a country where election doesn't decide anything anymore (and if it did, the last time was a few months after I was born), military force will at some point of decay.
It's peculiar to see a whole crowd of people illiterate in economics calling everybody outside their group "sheep".
Progressives are usually friendlier to the idea of raising taxes. Which is taking people's money. No, it's not different.
But it's people like you doing the same thing in every generation and acting surprised when it turns out that for any big corporation (including the goverment) they are bugs.
OK, now that's my grave mistake, I really didn't want to piss on you, but the wind ...
The Dunning-Krueger is strong with this one...
I'm not engaging with a sheep that has swallowed every crumb of bullshit they've been fed.
And since you're slow with phrases, this one's hopefully more clear: Go fuck yourself. Seeing the flavor of your comments on a thread concerning women's rights, that's likely all you'll ever do anyway.
That's like yelling "hold the thief" - the thief always starts first.
So what are you doing now, exactly? You could have been silent if you didn't want to engage.
I prefer fucking you.
Do you realize that everybody reading this can also check my comments in this thread?
And see that either you yourself have a problem with reading comprehension, or you are deliberately trying to deceive your readers.
Talk about idiotic word salad. You must love the sound of your own voice.
Some of us read books and have a bit longer attention span.
Now, it doesn't take any effort for me to inform you that you are to me what I am to Mozart using just a bit more text than you're used to, so I'm doing that.
No intelligent signs of life detected, Captain Kirk
Oh, I knew it. Seems to be a pattern with ST fans. Though the best person I know is one, but that's a rarity.
I'm more on the Jedi side, appreciating all life, even if not really intelligent. Which is why it's actually amusing to keep this going.
I'm a Sith, that explains everything. Peace is a lie, Jedi scum
Raising taxes on the people that chronically find ways to never pay taxes. Not raising taxes on regular people. Nice try framing the argument the way you think it ought to go.
You said it yourself.
Regular people range in age, income, education, districts where they live, various kinds of health, ethnic background and so on. Dunno why I wrote that.
How do you determine "regular" in the law, in simple unambiguous words?
I believe taxes for the top 3 (if not 4) quintiles in the US should be higher.
So yeah, regular people don't pay enough in taxes
OK. I'm in general against raising taxes, but if yes, then top 4, because market incentives (share of the tax income) work on governments too.
That doesn't really make any sense as a response. My concern with the second quintile is damaging social mobility, which is key to a growing economy
For you, but I explained why. The same reason as why something controlled by people from the upper quintiles may become "too big to fail".
The more you are taxing people, the more you want their income not to tank. I think this is obvious.
Again this makes no sense
I am not leftist, and I know more about economics than you do, clearly.
I didn't say I didn't understand you. I said what you said doesn't make sense. It's a nonsensical argument.
Pigouvian, taxes for example, do not depend on you having any income whatsoever.
Moreover the idea that "too big to fail" has anything to do with taxation is beyond absurd.
If you want to be taken seriously, know what you're talking about, and speak with specificity.
I am a proud neoliberal, and focused on evidenced-based policy, not a leftist.
Since you don't know what a pigouvian tax is, it's a tax designed to disincentives certain behaviors. "Sin" taxes are pigouvian. They're designed to address externalities not borne by the initial transaction.
I'm not surprised you have little understanding of terms, but perhaps instead of doing this limp-wristed slap fighting you could actually stay on topic and describe what the fuck you meant above.
The point of a pigouvian tax is not to fund the government, but to shape behavior and address externalities. Revenue is not the intent.
Again you're not saying anything meaningful or specific. You can just say "I was talking out of my ass and barely remember the conversation." It's fine.
Hardcore conservatives do hardcore conservative things
Ignorant libertarians: "ackshually it's the progressives fault"
Can you be a little more succinct and explain the direct link between what progressives want and the government taking children away from their families?
Yes, progressives are usually more centralist-democratic than institutionalist. So government taking something by force just because it's been voted for is more normal for them.
Thus I'm saying that this is one way this can look in reality. Though taking children is a bit too grotesque, yes. But it's not as if my tone here can change anything for people hit by this law.
To reiterate, I'm asking you to elaborate on a direct link between what progressives want and the government taking children away from their families.
What you've said is tantamount to: "well progressives want the government to do things, and now the government is doing bad things that progressives don't want them to do, but they're still things, just like progressives wanted."
But conservatives also want things. And government overreach is a thing, so they should be comfortable with it. Right?
But as you confirmed, you weren't making a point that applies to any particular political ideology. Really more of an obvious, shallow statement that you dressed up a little.
If you assume your audience is mostly progressive, then you can just state your point, and let probability do its thing.
Really doesn't make sense to tack that on there unless you're just laying lazy bait.
Got it, so lazy trolling.
Thanks for clearing that up.