Hi I’m new to Lemmy since Reddit decided to permaban me due to support I showed for Luigi. Good riddance to be honest. I should have fully quit when they shut down Apollo but didn’t know Lemmy existed.
Just keep in mind that if you are not satisfied with how your particular instance is running, you don't have to stop using lemmy like you did with reddit. You can switch to a different instance and keep on chilling!
No more switching services! Gotta love this place.
To expand on this: You can migrate accounts fairly easily. You can export your subscribed communities, and import them into your new account. So the only real thing you’re losing is your post history, but even that is seen as a bonus by many users who are looking to burn their old account.
Their excuse is monnney. Look at Twitter, people are pulling their ads because they are not happy with what's happening there. Keep the people who give you money happy and everything is fine. No matter if you would have to sell your soul (like Disney in China, to not get banned and miss millions of subscribers). Since the ad companies usually are big corporate, you can imagine what reddit their stance is.
I've read the manifesto. I have the same thoughts as you. I wonder with all these people calling him radical if maybe there's a fake manifesto out there. Something created JUST to make him sound crazy? That would explain the wildly different views of him being radical.
Remember, one month ago, the shooting hadn't happened yet. Nobody knew Luigis name or face. So if you go from not knowing he exists, to seeing him murder a guy, and then get told he has plans for domination, and kill all the people......it would be logical to understand why someone would call that perspective radicalized.
That's not what he is, or what he wrote, but if you read a fake manifesto, believed it to be real, that would explain people saying that.
Otherwise, I'm confused where "radicalized" comes from.
It's an acknowledgement that there's a massive problem.
These companies are literally willing to bankrupt you to death. Their behavior is inexcusable. They profiteer off of human suffering.
We live in a country founded by people who were unhappy with the status quo and were willing to pick up a gun to change things. We shouldn't act surprised that it still happens. I don't think we should celebrate it, because it's sad that this is happening in the first place, that someone feels they need to do this. This problem is solvable, and it can be solved civilly, or it will be solved uncivilly.
Thats exactly how I feel "Its sad that this is looking like the solution"
Like, it had to come to this? You couldnt just set up your little racket and keep the golden goose fat and happy? Or atleast adequately provided for and left alone?
Yeah at this point I'm like "political action? Yeah we tried that. You said no to that. Wealth and power, like everything else, will always seek equilibrium. You're the ones who decided it was going to be by guillotine." I just got certified to teach violence deescalation classes after taking those same classes for years working in mental health. There's one quote in particular that I've heard throughout multiple classes through multiple certifying agencies over that decade of working; "Violence is the language of the unheard" -MLK (you know, the "nonviolent protest" guy).
Thiel is one of reddits earliest investors. spez is a Thiel boy.
This whole time I can't believe how reddit managed to hold up a facade of being a cool progressive college student platform. They pulled the wool over everyone's eyes. It's as if they put lipstick on /pol/ and /b/. And everyone was like, alright a hip liberal platform. Sure if you ignore the iceberg of right wing bootlicking shit beneath the surface of the default subreddits.
I mean, he claims responsibility, confirmed the existing evidence, then states his motives which aren't hard to understand for even those out of the loop. I think the brevity and simple reasoning speak volumes louder than some maniacs scribblings found in a cabin. The fact that even those considered Semliterate would be able to grasp the bulk of his message was likely intentional.
Its actually not shitty at all, presuming his purpose was to inspire a shift in public discourse around the topic.
If he wanted it to be the centerpiece of a dramatic documentary miniseries, then yes, it was shitty.
I appreciate how quick a read is it. Much more likely for random people to read it and start thinking and then you can jump out of the bushes and go "surprise, you just read a manifesto!"
There are like 50 sentences of basic reality in there, but I suspect that a lot of the moderation challenge comes from one small phrase dropped into the middle: “it had to be done.”
With the inclusion of that, the 50 sentences of reality are recast as not just true but a valid justification for murder, even an argument that it was a duty, and that’s the rub.
The jailbait subreddit was regularly on the front page and openly joked about for years, Spez was even a mod for a bit "as a joke" until Anderson Cooper did a story about it.
If only Thomas Jefferson had somehow managed to cap a member of English Royalty. Instead, then Jefferson crossed the pond to suck up to Louis XVI, shortly before the man went full Ropespierre's Necktie.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government and provide new guards for their future security.
Yes it is. So what. The rich glorifies violence against the poor.
The leader of the country once said: "When the looting starts, the shooting starts"
So if its apparantly okay to use violence against alledged thieves (which is not okay btw, stealing should never equate a death sentence), then it must be okay to use violence against mass murderer CEOs.
"When the denying starts, the deposing starts" would be my rebuttal to that phase the ex-president said. Violence begets violence.
It certainly doesn't state it explicitly. It just says that the killer was the "first to face it" that way that implies that there is a possibility for more but the way I understood it was that current measures being taken aren't enough, that doesn't mean that other people wanting to take action should do so violently.
So if its apparantly okay to use violence against alledged thieves (which is not okay btw, stealing should never equate a death sentence), then it must be okay to use violence against mass murderer CEOs.
The reason violence against "looters" is permitted stems from their violation of the principles of the American caste system
Contrary to popular belief, you are not allowed to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps. You are only allowed to help yourself when you've received lending permission from a state recognized philanthropic sponsor. Otherwise, you are supposed to quietly drown in your own filth, where it isn't inconvenient for anyone higher on the totem pole than you.
The caste system is sacred. Brian Thompson earned his position. Luigi Mangione deserved his miserable fate.
I like that you put "looters" in quotes. After hurricane Katrina, the news would show "looters" and "people trying to survive," taking food items from grocery stores. I wonder what the difference was?
the difference
Skin hue
Yes, people were also taking electronics, but for food?
most CEOs don't murder, even the health insurance ones simply are committing theft analogs, simply not funding healthcare, not preventing those than can independently afford it from accessing it.
President Trump told reporters Friday evening that he didn't know the racially charged history behind the phrase "when the looting starts, the shooting starts." Trump tweeted the phrase Friday morning in reference to the clashes between protesters and police in Minneapolis following George Floyd's death.
Anyone with half a brain can see that it isn’t “glorifying” violence, it’s merely giving an explanation of why Luigi did what he did. Glorification would play more into pathos, but the manifesto is mostly ethos
Of course not, it's just Spez sucking up to the billionaires in the hope that one of them will be dumb enough to toss him a few million for his shitpile.
See, then you are giving a murderer's message publicity. As opposed to UnitedHealthcare, responsible for far more many deaths, having the ability to have as much publicity and as many lobbyists as they want.
I think he is more than just the (relatively trivial) allegations against him. He has rallied support for massively reforming the American Healthcare system, which will save countless lives, improve our quality of life, and ensure the financial stability of the American Public.
He has rallied support for massively reforming the American Healthcare system...
I would disagree with this. Nobody is talking about health care reform. People are talking about destroying an economic system that creates billionaires, and also about destroying the billionaires themselves. This hasn't been a call for reform, it's a call to arms.
The scariest thing is that people are beginning to accept that the system has always been rigged, and there is no other way to fix it.
I started to realize that the thing I liked about Reddit were the analytical and thoughtful people like me on the platform. When I came here, I found that many came over. When I visit Reddit, either because I'm nostalgic or because I have a specific need for something there, I'm finding more and more recent posts that are mostly filled with trash. Sure, some of the insightful, thoughtful and analytical people are still hanging around, but the vast majority has shifted away from that type of person. Reddit has also become so mainstream that is a stone's throw away from xitter or Facebook in terms of quality. Everyone and their mother is starting a Reddit account.
I've always thought well educated people have a great potential to be dangerous and achieve transcendental goals if organized. A group of engineers, of chemists, physicists, biologists, computer scientists after specific goals may be formidable enemies if they wanted. The 0.001%, the dirty rich, should now be aware.
I think I saw a report many years past that engineers make a bigger than expected proportion of radicalized people, in the context of middle east insurgencies.
I've definently noticed how more and more things are being disallowed to talk about on social media. It's just a matter of which platforms has which rules, but the rules are also changing as more and more people are complaining about reading things they don't agree with.
I suspect we will just discuss memes in the future, and politics, since politics is something that the leaders want us to care about and fight eachother over.
We used to make fun of Chinese social media censorship. Soon sharing images of Nintendo's Luigi will be as censored as sharing images of Winnie the Pooh in China.
I had the realization about this distinction several years ago regarding reddit. Over the years of attrition by various controversies, reddit no longer has moderators. They've all left. There are moderators in name but they do not moderate.
Many set the mod bots to do bot things and then fuck right off. To be fair moderating global scale messageboard is kind of an impossible task. Much less to do it for free. Can't fault the the old school internet moderators for leaving.
On another note. There's no way to tiptoe around the issue of intelligence. The baseline level of discourse just isn't capable of hard topics as it used to be. People seem to like the social drama that arises out of lack of moderation. That biases towards the lowest common denominators. It's like a modern day Jerry Springer shock jock entertainment. But live and interactive! Social media users seem to revel in it. Bread and circuses...
I think federal government probably sent a pretty please over to reddit HQ to censor this.
They're afraid of it fomenting further dissent. It's a delicate situation when the plebs are upset. A little bit is OK, in fact preferable. But too much can lead to a chain reaction that cannot be controlled.
Right like I (rightly or wrongly) associate the word "manifesto" with illogical rambling (maybe that's just being a psych nurse, I've received a lot of gibberish manifestos at 2am) but every word of this makes perfect sense and are things I've been saying for years. Because over half my patients aren't even manic or psychotic or have any other significantly mind altering disorder, they've just been pushed past every coping mechanism they had by this profoundly sick society we live in. One of the most powerful ways I help people in these crises is just by validating that and pointing them in the right direction. I've talked people out of literally physically punching me just by reminding them who we're all really being oppressed by and trying to give them the emotional tools they need to put that anger back where it belongs.
He's not any crazier than a construction worker out of work and living in poverty after losing their feet to diabetes because they've been living off fast food delivered to the jobsites they've spent most of their waking hours on for decades. He's not any crazier than a veteran who's been doing heroin for years to cope with their untreated service injuries and the realization that to get themselves out of poverty they were sent to Afghanistan to kill other poor people to make an oil baron more money. He's not any crazier than a homeless mother of two living out of her car who can't afford her kid's inhaler.
Those types of situations are meant to induce anxiety and anger in people! We evolved (or even were designed by God if that's how you view the world) to feel those emotions in the first place as a way to stimulate us to fight for our safety and protect ourselves. And what's finally motivating people IS that realization that it doesn't matter in the end if you're black or white, religious or atheist, gay or straight, or ANY of that. My one hope out of all of this is that the illusion of the culture war is finally falling away. I've caught "normie" coworkers saying "the only war is the class war." Conservatives and capitalist liberals; people I never would have guessed would see it. This can be the beginning if we let it be.
Reddit was full of false outrage and fake stories long before GPT ever existed. Just the last few people that were willing to post have kind of wandered off. I think we got the best of them here
Some communities just don't really have an equivalent elsewhere but I'm purely only lurking now. Don't comment anymore, use a modded third party client on mobile and ublock origin on desktop.
In this case, I think of more like Guy Fawkes…..there is clearly a problem with the us death care system. And we are right to be angry with these companies that profiteer on our sickness and in some cases that result in people dying from delayed or denied care. Is is right to murder someone? No, of course not. I think the question to ask is who is the real murderer?
Depends on the context in which you're sharing it.
If you share it with a title like "We need more of this", then yeah, because you're encouraging further acts like it. If you share it with a title like "This is the manifesto written by the alleged CEO killer", then that's not inherently glorifying violence, you're just sharing something you found and being informative. But if you share it in response to the question "Hey Reddit, what are some fun things I can do in NYC this weekend?", then you're back toward the "glorifying" side. Context makes all the difference.
Whether or not anybody gives a shit about that distinction, though, is a different question.
Why would it be? The only actual reference to violence is the fact that it happened ("[…] faced it with such brutal honesty.") and the reasoning behind it.
No, it's not. But there's a general fear that spreading manifestos of terrorists could cause people to believe them. They did the same thing with Bin Laden's manifesto.
For the record, I oppose this, it's just that I can understand why this sort of thing is done.
I think there's a difference. School shootings are an atrocity, and, for the most part, we all agree on that. Sharing the manifesto lends a kind of legitimacy to the shooter and their reasons, and, on balance, we'd rather turn our back on them and condemn the violence.
With this CEO murder, many of us agree there's such life-destroying abuse in the American healthcare commerce - of which this CEO was directly part, whether or not he's to blame - that the problem is a serious topic of public conversation. The manifesto, and the events associated with it, are a relevant part of that conversation, whether we support them or not.
Are you sure? Your position that it's not wordy to anyone else can be defeated by even a single person whose position agrees with mine. It's indefensible. If you want you can wait to see your position defeated publicly, or quietly accept defeat. Let me know what you pick (silence is an answer :) and I'll be sure to celebrate appropriately. Have a day.