rational_lib @ rational_lib @lemmy.world

https://rationallib.substack.com/

---

Read more

Posts

7

Comments

485

Joined

12 mo. ago

Here's how this works:

1. Network is created that doesn't discriminate on speech.
2. The left wins debates and it becomes increasingly liberal over time.
3. Far right billionaires buy it to stop those process.

What, specifically, was the "pro genocide platform"? Because I remember that election pretty well, and I don't recall any advocacy of genocide, at least not from Harris.

Let's be honest for one second. Here's how American politics on Israel actually breaks down:

Democrats: often criticize Netanyahu but never actually cut off aid. However, several Democrats already opposed continuing aid to Israel and the rest of the party conceivably could listen to growing opposition to Israel's war.

Republicans: actively hate all poor brown people and want Israel to kill them all. They will also use deportations and any other means available to silence anyone voicing opposition to said killing of all poor brown people.

I get that neither choice is perfect, but I really can't see why it's a struggle.

I'll say this about Charlie Kirk: while inconsistent, at some point he wanted the Epstein files released. Let's mourn him properly. Let's get those files. Do it for Charlie™.

Let's gloat about this.

The "unhinged radicals" this whole time have been the Republicans scaring people with totally unfounded claims of a trans uprising, calling to use the government to silence the left, getting people fired for posting that Kirk kinda had it coming, fighting each other at vigils, chanting "white men fight back".

And this whole time we kinda knew it wasn't the left. That this moronic clown wasn't worth wasting perfectly good bullets on. We just waited for everyone to find out.

Someone on reddit found the t shirt, definitely the same kind. It has a flag and eagle with "land of the free, home of the brave".

It also is listed in numerous places as a "disabled veterans national foundation" shirt.

Under the circumstances, could be relevant.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/317271063419

Update: seems to be a gift for donating to that organization. https://www.dvnf.org/freegift15/

Of course the usual caveats - don't assume this person actually donated to them, or even is the actual shooter. But yeah, this all may be a clue why they're so slow to tell us what they know about the shooter, given that it increasingly looks like it doesn't support the narrative they led with.

I mean look at literally anything that actually has worked. Civil disobedience, documenting and publicizing fascist abuses, and yes IF you have the military advantage AND everything else has failed, fight violently - but targeting the leaders, not some clown who's exploiting fascism for personal gain.

Look at what just happened in DC. There's lots to criticize there, but nonviolence still worked. The takeover was an embarrassing fiasco and it's expiring right now. Done. And the most violence used was throwing a sandwich.

No lone assassin has ever defeated fascism. Certainly not one who isn't even targeting an actual leader.

Of course they did it for attention. I'm not saying this about the Trump shooter. I'm saying this about someone who targeted not an oligarch, not Trump himself or anyone with actual concrete power. But a guy whose job was to speak in front of crowds. The crowd and the spectacle was the point. Nothing is to be gained by removing Charlie Kirk from existence. His damage is already done, and this just makes that worse by giving him free sympathy and attention.

Whoever did this clearly didn't care that they were harming the left and helping the far right, at least they didn't care more about that than getting attention for themselves.

This whole time we've been wondering how Trump will distract from Epstein, then someone does it for him. If this is a leftist, it's the dumbest fucking leftist ever.

I just wanna say, even if this guy turns out to be antifa or whatever, fuck him. He stole the headlines from Trump-Epstein and made a ridiculous oligarch bootlicker like Charlie Kirk seem sympathetic. He didn't do this to defend Trump's victims, he did it to get attention. If he dies before getting captured, piss on his grave.

Hopefully though he's some right winger who thought Kirk was too far left. Unlikely, but if it does happen then watch how fast this drops from the headlines.

Edit: I'm now increasingly convinced this is not a leftist. Ignore this post and thread.

Trump wouldn't kill one of his most loyal fundraisers.

I just want to point out some things since everyone is assuming it was a leftist shooter:

1. No one knows who the shooter actually is.
2. Most leftist reactions I've seen to Kirk have been to laugh at his stupidity, not get murderously angry at him.
3. No political message has appeared yet, like the one Luigi put on the bullets he used. Which if you're a leftist shooter, come on you gotta at least do that homage.
4. The shooter killed him with one shot from a distance and got out without being caught.
5. I've never met a leftist who knows how to shoot a gun, nevermind one with that level of skill. If it was a leftist, I'm surprised they couldn't catch them by now by simply arresting the one leftist who knows how to shoot at long distance.

It's the 48 Star American flag, thus it's the German American Bund in the 30s. To be fair to the literal Nazis pictured it's before the holocaust was discovered. It's not AI, it appears in this 2017 article: https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/06/american-nazis-in-the-1930sthe-german-american-bund/529185/

They're really against anything nice that can be achieved through cooperation, aren't they?

Nah they would just invent new races. What's the point of race? What does it mean exactly? Notice that the races in the US at least roughly align with economic classes.

That's not an accident. Obviously without the concept of races, people would still have different skin color and hair, but the implications would be entirely different. Culture, neighborhoods, etc. wouldn't be separated. And most importantly, it would be ever so slightly harder for rich people to make the majority feel like they're in the same group as them as opposed to some "other".

So if there was only one race, the rich would need to invent new ones.

The reality is his name is redacted because he's a Republican, and he can't be prosecuted because he's a Republican.

What "shaking the ruling class" did luigi do? They shrugged it off and went right on with the most massive corrupt looting in American history. When billionaires can afford their own private armies, or better yet bend the public one to their will, they don't give a fuck about your pea shooter.

Stopping them requires taking their money. And that means winning elections and taxing the living shit out of them.

The Democrats had it during their entire presidency

Specificity is the path to the truth. People call out for "the list", but don't seem to know exactly what this is. Given that all this activity is illegal, there's little point in storing a list of illegal sex clients in QuickBooks.

Instead, the closest thing would probably be a contact list, with people who were in on it and not mixed in. Prosecutors definitely have such a list, as it was shown in court - exhibit "GX52". This list was partly shown in the Maxwell trial, but also sealed by the judge - not Democrats. Supposedly it contains "many, many, many, many names" including some with "massage at Palm Beach".

Now you could say, why didn't Biden tell the DOJ to release that list. Probably for the same reason he didn't tell them to drop the prosecution of Hunter, which he later pardoned him for. Be cynical as you want about the separation of the DOJ and the president, (which Trump has consistently ignored) Biden did make a show of upholding it. And releasing the list to embarrass Trump would be a pretty blatant violation of that principle. It would also probably violate the seal order, making DOJ attorneys vulnerable to contempt.

Imagine doing such a bad job as mayor that even as an incumbent, you're polling behind Curtis Sliwa.

Here's Elon just before the 2024 election telling Tucker Carlson:

If Trump wins that Epstein client list is gonna become public. And some of those billionaires behind Kamala are terrified of that outcome

I'll just point out the risk of what I'll call "Joe Roganing" here. Elon pretends he hates both parties while there's no election coming up. Then when the election arrives he "makes up his mind" and endorses Republicans. This allows him to 1) attract people fed up with both parties just to hand them to Republicans, and 2) have a credible that that forces Republicans to do his bidding.

Well that would eliminate the whole point of corporations, which is to make it easy to raise money.

Let's start with an understanding of why corporations suck in the first place. The root of all good and evil in a corporation is limited lability. This allows investors to not have to worry that they're going to lose more than their investment, so they don't need to think too hard before putting their money in some company they just heard of. This is great for investors and for the corporation.

But this comes with a cost to everyone else. There's the direct cost that if the corporation ends up owing people money through excessive debt, negligence, or illegal activities, they can declare bankruptcy and the investors don't have to worry any paying for those (other than their losses on the stock). But I suspect the more pernicious effect is that the investors' lack of concern over their investment as anything but a vehicle of profit basically leads them to pick sociopathic CEOs and demand profit maximizing behavior at the cost of social good and even long term stability. And since all this sociopathic activity is really great at amassing money, it's kind of a big power boost for sociopathy overall.

However, the ease of investing can be a good thing for society too - basically it allows a lot of people to retire at some point, and allows for rapid funding of new ideas. So is there a way to get corporations back under control without throwing out the baby? I tend to think we should tax corporations higher if nothing else, as it is we do the opposite thanks to Trump's last tax cut plan.