Oh yeah, just look at all that genociding going on!

No, it's people like you refusing to accept reality but rather willfully hiding in your racist propagandized little bubble who can't be taken seriously.

I posted this as a reply to another comment from a user on another instance, but your instance doesn't allow you to see hexbear, so I'll reply here too.

Yeah, it's a bit unfortunate using the word design that way. However, it's not completely wrong, it's almost more a problem of the baggage that the word design carries, obviously "intelligent design" as a concept for evolution is bullshit and if you can't separate the concept of "design" from intent then you're still just as wrong. All that said, I think it's fair to talk about species being designed, there is just absolutely zero intent involved anywhere,* with no forethought, or any "thought" at all from the designer. A species is "designed" entirely by the forces of circumstance. The material conditions, if you will, of their environment.

Making this comment because I'm seeing some of these issues crop up in the comments, and in comments from different instances that can't see each other, so rather than reply individually, I'll just make a separate standalone comment.

It bugs me a little whenever people talk about how old a species is. There are different levels to how wrong it is possible to be about this. The worst level is where people think that it's the individuals that are somehow ancient. No. The individuals from those times are as long gone as all the other individuals from that time. Most people don't think that, but it happens. Another level is a bit less wrong, but still is. That the species itself is ancient because it somehow avoided evolution. Nah, it's just retained a lot of characteristics. Theses species still underwent evolution, it's literally unavoidable. It's just that the way they adapted to an ancient environment still works as adaptation to the current (and intervening) environments. They haven't gone through as many drastic visible changes because the way their ancestors lived still works for their modern iterations.

So it is definitely fair to say a species is old, but it's important to realize that that doesn't mean it's literally old in that it hasn't evolved. If they are impressed by species that haven't gone through a lot of apparent changes over the eons, they should check out stromatolites.

Then they have the correct position, at least on the second part (and honestly I doubt anyone there doesn't care). Voting won't make one goddamn lick of a difference on this issue and if you think it will, you're painfully naive.

A large portion of the personal wealth in America is concentrated in real estate (mortgage debt).

When Obama became president, he could have easily bailed out the 9 million American homeowners (predominantly low income black and Hispanic families), but instead he chose Wall Street, effectively facilitating the largest transfer of wealth from the black community to private capital in history.

In this sense, Obama prevented future generations of black communities from ever becoming homeowners again.

Similar trends are also happening under Biden’s policies today, the so-called “Bidenomics” where black unemployment has risen much faster than other demographics. These are all austerity measures designed to make poor minorities bear the brunt of the economic impact if only to slow the crumbling of the system itself.

But since "the government actually profited" it's all good, right?

I'm not sure exactly what you mean, but both sides have their defenders and haters making pictures, toons, caricatures etc like this of their opponent, they always have. But it so happens that this particular artist doesn't like Trump or Biden (same as me).

I live in the US, born and raised. I am queer and a racial minority as well as very politically active. I and everyone I know will be refusing to vote for Biden. He has made nothing meaningfully better since Trump and in fact has made things worse. Regardless of that, I can't in good conscience vote for someone aiding a genocide. I think everyone who is voting for Biden in the US must be very privileged and unaware or otherwise removed from the effects of the severe decline in living standards under his administration. But even if that weren't true... he's aiding a literal mass-child-murder genocide, and by voting for him, I'd feel like I was giving my approval for such a heinous, despicable thing. I wish the democrats had put forward a decent human being that I could vote for, but they didn't, and I can't. The US is sliding towards fascism and if you think that won't keep happening just because the blue team puts their geriatric genocidal guy at the top, I think you're painfully naive.

Wow. Unironically spouting nazi propaganda in a thread about the nazis being evil. What a load of ahistorical bullshit.

I personally feel these are the end days of what’s left of the freedom internet.

I hope you're wrong. I guess that should go without saying. But I don't know, it seems like they've been trying to crack down and been consistently failing at it, which is hopeful. Like youtube's attempt to make adblockers not work anymore ending up just strengthening uBlock Origin and making it work even better than it did before. lol.

Obviously, google et al have all the power, but even so, they mostly keep losing battles, which is both hilarious and hopeful. I agree that we're seeing the further enshitification of all the big social media giants and they're corralling and enclosing the commons more all the time. But I haven't given up on all the little things that spring up to address that enshitification, like the frontends, like searx, and hell, even lemmy. You were 100% right, we need to evolve, but I would say these things are good mutations that are part of the process of that necessary evolution.

I don't know, I'm too high rn not to go off on tangents.

The only people I know of who don't know what the word "liberal" means, especially in the context the person above was using it, are very ignorant Americans. To be clear, even though I don't like most Americans, I'm not blaming them for being ignorant in this particular case because they have been subjected to decades of mostly uncontested propaganda deliberately obfuscating the term. But most of the rest of the world knows what everyone is talking about when saying "liberal" and knows it's a right wing ideology. And everyone shouldn't have to hold up the conversation to preemptively explain what the word means to those who don't already know. People are generally expected to pick up the gist of a sentence or point via the context of what's being said. The context was perfectly clear and it just sounds like concern trolling to go on about needing to hand-hold and dumb down the terminology being used for "the average person."

Lemmygrad isn't "hated" by most of the wider lemmyverse. There's just a loud and obnoxious minority of people that will rail and rant about lemmygrad. They loudly rant about lemmygrad because they aren't used to seeing their worldview get challenged and by its very nature as a radical leftist community, lemmygrad is a challenge to the typical background liberal perspective.

It's no surprise we all end up seeing a lot of threads about "those mean tankies at lemmygrad" (and hexbear too) made by people who can't take their worldview getting questioned, or even shown to be flawed, or just not standing up to their own scrutiny, and who get mad when that happens. There are also of course people with ideological reasons to demonize leftwing politics and will spread shit for that reason alone. But overall, I don't think most people care enough except to think "oh yeah that's that instance with those radical lefties, they're weird but they do make some great memes sometimes."

They're just pulling it out of their ass because "RuZsIa eBiL DiCtAtOrShIp!"

Thank you for this. Very helpful.

The fuck are you talking about? There are all kinds of laws that make something legal or not based on someone's age, and they often vary by state or even locale. Hell, there's a minimum age for running for president for chryssake and it's well past any definition of adulthood.

It's over when Ukraine's military collapses because it has no more forced-conscripted old men, boys, and women left to throw into the meat grinder. Or when the west recognizes it's a lost cause and decides they had better come up with some excuses and a new narrative in order to pull support. Both of these things are already slowly beginning to happen.

Sure, geopolitics doesn't exist, it's all just this craaaaaayzee guy twirling his evil mustache. It's not like the Russian government has any say, or that almost everyone in it not only support the SMO but many of them think Putin is too soft on Ukraine and should commit much more of their military to it. It's not like over 70% of the Russian public also supports the SMO and Putin's decisions, saying they should never make concessions to return the Donbas to Ukraine. I mean, it's not like most of the world aside from the propaganda-steeped NATO countries also side with Russia with respect to the conflict. Nope. None of that. Just that one maniacal power hungry madman!

https://www.eiu.com/n/russia-can-count-on-support-from-many-developing-countries/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/30/negative-views-of-russia-mainly-limited-to-western-liberal-democracies-poll-shows

lol. It's so funny these fucking dweebs who can't understand the world beyond a simplistic Saturday-morning-cartoon kind of analysis with Putin being this season's villain.