paraphrand

“Things happen”

The call is coming from inside the house.

No way, is this real?

No one “makes money” they transfer it.

“I knew this was wrong and only did it because I thought I had fascist immunity”

I actually hope any and all Epstein docs end up in all aggregated AI training data sets.

She must hang out on Reddit, cuz this sounds like a Reddit comment.

I hope it sticks.

Don’t be shy, throw it on the pile of world changing predictions for 2027:

• China invades Taiwan
• Alien disclosure happens
• Trump ends democracy
• The singularity occurs
• Solid state batteries enter the market
• The year of Linux on the desktop

These are all real predictions. Except for maybe the Linux one. I’m not shit posting. And the list could go on, I’m just not remembering more of them right now.

Edit: y’all are no fun. And to be clear, I was NOT refuting the person I replied to. I am merely pointing out that we have a bumpy road ahead.

I was taught by various sources that the reason there is some truth to the idea that democrats and republicans are the same is that they are both participating in perpetuating and spreading neoliberalism. That’s the point of view I have. Do you disagree with that?

I’m not trying to redefine anything, I’m expressing a point of view. From what I can tell, republican/democrat and neoliberal are not mutually exclusive terms.

What the hell? Democrats and Republicans are neoliberals. They both participate in neoliberalism as it has been since, like, the 1970s/1980s. When everything started being dismantled.

Neoliberalism is an economic and political theory advocating for free-market capitalism with minimal government intervention, emphasizing privatization, deregulation, and free trade.

So, NAFTA, deregulating all sorts of industries, a lack of regulation on the tech industry, dismantling or not supporting unions, etc.

This tariff stuff does not change anything, imo.

Are you guys all neoliberalism supporters or something?

Neoliberalism is maintained with the two party system we have. And the two sides participate in the ratchet effect.

This is why both sides are going crazy over Zohran.

It feels like you are just using labels a bit wrong. I’m not arguing against your point, just your choice of labels. All these downvotes without proper explanation to help me understand is really lame.

My point was that they are all neoliberals.

Edit: What the hell? Democrats and Republicans are neoliberals. They both participate in neoliberalism as it has been since, like, the 1970s/1980s. When everything started being dismantled.

Neoliberalism is an economic and political theory advocating for free-market capitalism with minimal government intervention, emphasizing privatization, deregulation, and free trade.

This tariff stuff does not change anything, imo.

Are you guys all neoliberalism supporters or something?

I’m worried it will turn into political violence. 😔

“Republicans and neoliberals” is redunant.

I’m now sick of all the slammed comments.

Sounds like more of that stochastic terrorism to me.

Keep pumping billions into AI. I’m sure it’ll fix the numbers.

What I heard of it all sounded like projection.

So you’re saying social media isn’t a cesspool? That’s what these quotes are highlighting.

You don’t need to argue with my comment, a comment that quotes the article like that. It’s not suggesting this was a “both sides” situation, and that Kirk had upsides. It’s pointing out polarization, and lack of decorum, lack of sensitivity, a pressure to race to post, gross incentives for profit and many other toxic properties of social media.

Kirk was a shithead. Don’t get me wrong. But, all your reply is is restating facts about Kirk and the right wings tactics and not discussion about the topic of the article.

I specifically quoted these in hope of replies that were not just statements that reflect one side of the toxic discourse. Even if they are correct and factual about Kirk and the corrosive rhetoric he and his organization peddle.

The article is about extreme polarization. And polarization means there is no nuance. Nuance would be following the facts, not making up ones own lies about the radical left.

The article is about talking past each other instead of with each other. The article is about people just posting their views instead of engaging with others in a nuanced way.

“Lack of Nuance” here is talked about broadly as a property of social media platforms. Not as a property of Kirk.

But Hemmer added, the choice of others to reshare [graphic content] is driven by the fact that social media “rewards this kind of extreme content.” Many who re-shared the images are making money and gaining followers off of it, she notes. “That’s just part of the incentive structure of media today,” she said.

…Nuance fails in online platforms designed to boost and sustain engagement and promote content likely to provoke a reaction from users. Already, social media pundits on the left are questioning whether the texts and interviews in the charging documents are real. Meanwhile, those on the right are agitating to declare left wing activists as terrorists.