Comment by libertine

3 days ago

What makes you think there are any chickens left? Because it looks like it's all foxes.

This administration got elected because tech billionaires invested in it. They were right behind them, and I mean literally.

Isn't it possible that this was all deliberately done by tech companies to get access to data and consolidate their position, and secure public funding?

16 comments

libertine

Reply
GiorgioG  3 days ago

Let's not pretend this started with this administration. I'm not pointing any fingers at any one party or politician, but this is nothing new:

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_surveillance_disclosure...

'By the late 1990s ECHELON was reportedly capable of monitoring up to 90% of all internet traffic. According to the BBC in May 2001, however, "The US Government still refused to admit that Echelon even exists."'

  • bilbo0s  3 days ago

    This.

    You could also say that this is what the people have wanted for decades.

    Remember the PATRIOT Act? Voted in by a vote of 99 to 1 in the senate. (And the 1 who voted against it? Yeah, we got rid of him for a more "law and order" type guy.)

    What we're seeing is just the people getting more of what they're demanding. You get the government you deserve. And you deserve to get that government good and hard as often as possible.

  • libertine  2 days ago

    I don't think it started with this administration, but the normalization of corruption sure did.

voidhorse  3 days ago

This. Most of them weren't exactly bullied.

Outside of having a military, several tech companies are probably more powerful than nation states at this point, and I think some of them realize this. As long as a complete slip into barbarism is still not fully on the table, nations need the data that tech companies have more or less entirely captured and established a complete hegemony around at this point. They also rely directly on their products. I guess the EU is starting to wake up to how problematic this is.

philipallstar  3 days ago

> This administration got elected because tech billionaires invested in it

This is just not true. If one party sprints leftward and then points at the other party and calls them far right, eventually people notice.

The top issues were illegal immigration, prices, and the fact that the Democrats just couldn't answer the question "what is a woman?" even when being confirmed as supreme court justices.

If you look totally mad and self-destructive, you will eventually lose in America. Unless you're Gavin Newsom, perhaps.

  • libertine  2 days ago

    I'm sorry, but this comment looks like it's straight out of a podcast comments section of Joe Rogan or Asmongold.

    > The top issues were illegal immigration, prices, and the fact that the Democrats just couldn't answer the question "what is a woman?" even when being confirmed as supreme court justices.

    You didn't realize the whole subject of "what is a woman" was pretty much a "minor issue", blown out of proportion by MAGA, social networks, and podcasts?

    Like, how was that subject more important than January 6? Doesn't it bother you more that a former president (now president) tried to stop a vote count?

    It's insane what social media is doing to people.

    > If you look totally mad and self-destructive, you will eventually lose in America. Unless you're Gavin Newsom, perhaps.

    The fact that you lack the awareness of how mad and self-destructive this administration is, not just internally within the USA, but also the destruction of decades of soft power, is truly mind-blowing to me.

    If you think that the demands for rights of a fraction of a minority are "totally mad and self-destructive", but what's happening every week since the administration took over is normal, then I don't think we're operating in the same reality plane.

    • philipallstar  12 hours ago

      > You didn't realize the whole subject of "what is a woman" was pretty much a "minor issue", blown out of proportion by MAGA, social networks, and podcasts?

      When I say that was one of the main issues people voted on, what does it mean to be a minor issue blown out of proportion? Does that mean they didn't really vote on it in a significant way? Or do you mean they did, but you think they shouldn't have?

      > Like, how was that subject more important than January 6? Doesn't it bother you more that a former president (now president) tried to stop a vote count?

      I've never seen any particular fallout or actual problem that came out of January 6 other than people saying how bad it was. Certainly not based on any footage I saw. Equally I'm not that bothered by the Democrats removing their democractically elected candidate and replacing him at the last minute with a party leadership-ordained one. But you should probably be if you're that worried about Jan 6, as that was far more consequential.

      > The fact that you lack the awareness of how mad and self-destructive this administration is, not just internally within the USA, but also the destruction of decades of soft power, is truly mind-blowing to me.

      It might be worth re-reading my post. It was talking about the election, and not what's happened post election. Seeing all of Republican behaviour across all time with no context as to when things happened isn't going to bear much fruit, I think.