all 30 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 32 points 1 year ago (16 children)

It’s pretty insane that Trump’s being allowed to do this

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    Why won't somebody do something

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (10 children)
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago* (9 children)

    What are you up to tonight. Scrolling?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Pointing out to you how useless everyone here is. How the left is full of people saying that they'll do something and who are pissed off every day but they can't be bothered to create content, build networks or spread awareness. They think they'll show up to some protest 3 cities away and that will somehow fix stuff because that's what worked in the 70s. What are you doing, seriously what are you doing? Just trying to keep the status quo that's working great currently, what are you trying to defend here?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    This may be a groundbreaking idea, but people actually exist outside of lemmy and do stuff

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    But they don't. The average leftist left all social media. It's clear as day given that so much content is absent any left ideas. The reason people in all our lives all agree that Charlie Kirk was such a great guy is because people on the left doing exist in any significant way outside of a couple digital spaces. One of those is Lemmy. Go get a sample and start asking random people if they have social media accounts elsewhere anymore. Go ask people in your life if they're aware of any of the ideas on the left. Go on any social media and see if you're getting videos defending left wing principals or is it just toxic hate posts. The left abandon digital spaces and retreated to places like Lemmy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    And for good reason. The feds are watching online spaces. Any real plans to remove those in charge would get people shoved onto unmarked vans by chuds in masks. If leftists are planning something it is taking place in the backs of coffee shops and shit. Read like, anything about opsec lmao.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago

    Look at history. Small in-person meetings in a coffee shop are easy to infiltrate and discredit. The FBI did this for decades: they didn’t just spy on groups, they nudged them toward extremism to alienate them from the public and make arrests easier.

    Compare that to online organizing. A hundred people posting ten pieces of content a day isn’t a coffee shop — it’s 1,000 messages a day, 30,000 a month. That’s a tide of ideas washing over the public again and again, shaping opinion slowly but surely.

    Everyone from advertising to politics knows repetition is the key. Exposure, over and over, is what changes minds. The right understands this and has built enormous influence through it. The left, time and time again, fails to grasp or commit to this strategy.

    You don’t need to do anything illegal. You need consistent, persistent content. That’s how movements actually win.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1nu94z4/moral_tone_of_rightwing_redditors_varies_by/

    Literally what I'm talking about. You win this by numbers. You win this by drowning them out. They win by convincing you to hold meetings in coffee shops while simultaneously removing yourself from other digital spaces

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago

    Shouldn't Trump be thanking Comey for going outside procedure right before an election just to say, "Clinton sure is sus" for no reason?

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The grand jury indicted based on a massive lie which will fall apart in court.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    As is expected when only one side of the story is allowed to be told. It's also why grand juries don't really matter. Any headline referring to one is generally click bait, since alot of people don't know theyr basically just a pretrial checkpoint

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 48 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Idiocracy is sort of like the Left's version of the Great Replacement Theory. And the underlying premise doesn't work for the same reason that the Great Replacement Theory doesn't work.

    That being said, Idiocracy's predictions have been scarily prescient. People are making dumber and dumber decisions. But it's not because of dumb people having more children than smart people. It's more due to economic inequality, parents failing to teach their children to think for themselves, people being exposed to more and smarter propaganda, and perhaps things like childhood malnutrition.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The core concept of it, effectively it is eugenics, IQ etc...

    The real part of it is, it's not eugenics, it's education that's hitting the spiral. Poorly educated people, keep getting convinced to make education less accessible and worse, leading to more poorly educated people, that vote harder on it, ad infinium.

    Bottom line, religion and power structures have found education as their target to limit, and have been for decades.

    I do agree the opening of idiocracy really presented some extreme "eugenics" vibes to it. Which also is kind of weird because the end of if basically presented the opposite. Where not sure in his mediocre knowledge starts pushing for education improvements, improving the culture etc... Not sure's conclusion at the end was basically that everyone is ignorant not dumb, and society could gradually be fixed by actually trying.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 14 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The introduction may be confusing but it wasn’t advocating for eugenics, the movie intro can be viewed as dumb people raise their kids to be dumb, not that intelligence was passed down genetically. And you are correct, religion and power need uneducated people to maintain hegemony.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    where I gotta disagree with you on their framing.

    For starters, it's talking evolution. A specific biological process about inherited genes.

    "How did this happen? Evolution does not make moral judgments. Evolution does not necessarily reward that which is good or beautiful. It simply rewards those who reproduce the most."

    Next point is, it's showing IQ scores. Fans of IQ scores, generally also believe in the studies that imply they are innate, heritable traits.

    Sorry but am I completely missing something, is there one part in this intro that even once implies intelligence as, cultural, education, or really says anything other than "smart people have smart kids, if they have them", "dumb people have dumb kids".

    Again I hold to the gist, it's a comedy, not meant to be perfectly clear scientific thesis, but the speach from the narrator, is almost always that. even with the ending of "they gave birth to three children, the 3 smartest kids in the world". "his vice president Frido took 8 wives and had 32 kids, the dumbest kids to ever walk the earth".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago
    [–] -1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Fuck this eugenics spouting movie that blames individual weakness over systemic evil.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    It's not eugenics, it's evolution. Eugenics is intentional, the intelligent population in the movie dies off due to unplanned, natural ecological factors. Also, it's a comedy, just chill out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Intelligence is not a genetic trait. The claim that it is one is a myth used to perpetuate eugenics. It comes from the archaic claim that "black people are inherently less intelligent than white people" because "white people are genetically superior".

    It has nothing to do with evolution.

    Also, the flimsy excuse "it's just a joke" is simply that: an excuse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Intelligence is not a genetic trait

    Wait, where the hell did you get this idea? Racially? No, intelligence spans significantly from individual to individual regardless of race, but on that individual level, genetics have a significant impact on intelligence.

    Not only that, but the movie makes no commentary on race whatsoever, throwing that in is solely your own addition.

  • source
  • parent