US Politics thread

[Onderhond]

The answer is things like public mental health services, proper public transportation and medicare, unionized living wage jobs, more public spaces etc.

Meh. Other countries have that and they're dealing with the same problems. Not that I don't think the US could use all of that, but they won't be a magical solution to the broader problems we are dealing with.

it's not their fault if people don't know they're private spaces.

But they aren't even advertised as "private" spaces. They are advertised as big, social, communal platforms. It's really different from a shop (or any sort of real-world analogy for that matter). They are unprecedented places where millions of people can gather and find each other. Yes, that brings new problems along with it, a lot of them having to do with (relative) anonymity, bubbles and echo chambers (a direct result of how money-hungry these companies are) and broader interactions, with people who experience the world differently.

Banning people who can't properly deal with that isn't going to solve anything. These people will still be around, they won't have learned anything and they'll just get madder, making the problem even worse.

It's about as effective as jailing drug addicts.

[OldAle1]

Drug addicts are harming only themselves, and maybe a few people around them. People posting hateful invective and calling for violence on sites that reach billions of people are capable of doing a lot of damage.

But I agree with this

They are advertised as big, social, communal platforms. It's really different from a shop (or any sort of real-world analogy for that matter). They are unprecedented places where millions of people can gather and find each other. Yes, that brings new problems along with it, a lot of them having to do with (relative) anonymity, bubbles and echo chambers (a direct result of how money-hungry these companies are) and broader interactions, with people who experience the world differently.

Fact is social media is an entirely new phenomenon that can't be readily compared to a shop, or a town square, or traditional publishing or media, or a government, and we just haven't figured out the tools yet to both make it reasonably safe (and we can't even agree on what "safe" means can we) and yet accessible to everybody, and not make particular groups feel left out. I think it's up to sociologists, historians and psychologists as much as it is to tech gurus and legislators to figure this out and we're not going to get there this year or probably this decade.

[RogerTheMovieManiac88]

(Anti-)social media is the new Big Brother. They say they look out for you. Many people accept this implicitly along with the control and influence these companies wield over discourse and agenda-setting.

I was reading yesterday that among the purge of accounts erased over recent days by Twitter was one in which former Democrats detailed why they left the party. Now, I was not in the least bit familiar with this account and it might have been spewing bilious hatred, but it does serve again to underscore the sort of mindset of those in Silicon Valley.

I have deleted my Twitter account - which I hardly used anyway.

[matthewscott8]

I have Twitter to follow Scott Barley mainly, keep uptodate on his film projects. It's a website where it's hard to see the value, the short character limit encourages hot takes and lack of nuance. Facebook at least seems to be more oriented around keeping in touch with family and friends.

It is highly problematic to say the least that laws related to free speech predate the internet, and we just don't know as a society how to deal with its existence.

Reddit often seems pretty well run, and ppl mostly respectful of one another

[OldAle1]

I have Twitter to follow Scott Barley mainly, keep uptodate on his film projects. It's a website where it's hard to see the value, the short character limit encourages hot takes and lack of nuance. Facebook at least seems to be more oriented around keeping in touch with family and friends.

It is highly problematic to say the least that laws related to free speech predate the internet, and we just don't know as a society how to deal with its existence.

Reddit often seems pretty well run, and ppl mostly respectful of one another

INDIVIDUAL subreddits can be pretty good, yes, but it's really dependent on the quality of the moderators. I've heard a lot about terrible shit on reddit, but I haven't personally seen it - only look at 1 sub with any regularity and 3 or 4 others very occasionally.

I don't personally see any value in Twitter whatsoever because of yeah, the character limit. But maybe that's because I don't really know how to constrain my writing that way unless making a brief snarky quip.

[Onderhond]

Twitter works well as some modern-day RSS, where you can share links and updates that aren't necessarily on the platform itself. You can follow a distributor for example and be kept up to date on their releases with links to press releases.

For almost everything else, it's terrible. And there are other platforms out there who are just as efficient in doing what Twitter does well.

[xianjiro]

(Anti-)social media is the new Big Brother. They say they look out for you. Many people accept this implicitly along with the control and influence these companies wield over discourse and agenda-setting.

I was reading yesterday that among the purge of accounts erased over recent days by Twitter was one in which former Democrats detailed why they left the party. Now, I was not in the least bit familiar with this account and it might have been spewing bilious hatred, but it does serve again to underscore the sort of mindset of those in Silicon Valley.

I have deleted my Twitter account - which I hardly used anyway.

That seems like a terrible reason to delete a single account, but like you said "spewing bilious hatred" or maybe they just got caught in a whole flush of guilt by association. Hard to say.

I deleted my personal Twitter years back after I was blocked. When I asked why, the response was "it was a mistake" and so I never understood. Decided then and there I didn't want to rely on them for anything.

[Pretentious Hipster]

?

https://www.state.gov/biographies/donald-j-trump/

Edit: Seems like they got hacked and changed Trump's bio to say that his presidency ended today

[Pretentious Hipster]

The problem with Twitter is that it is a worldwide phenomenon that lies in the interest of America. The right says that the ban on Trump is then falling to communism but believe me the anti-imperalist left get banned all the time there, even the shitposters. Not to mention them marking countries like China as state-affiliated media but not something like BBC. I'm not really on board with China doing it but I can totally see why China banned twitter.

[xianjiro]

?

https://www.state.gov/biographies/donald-j-trump/

Edit: Seems like they got hacked and changed Trump's bio to say that his presidency ended today

shoot! It would have been nicer if it was his way of saying "I quit" you know, like how he informed some folks they'd been fired by indirect tweet or I think once in a statement to a reporter. Real class all the way - but then again, that's one thing money can't buy though it can hire a much better spokesperson.

[xianjiro]

So Parler was banned from Google and Apple. Amazon won't host them and CC companies are declining transactions for Trump-affiliated services.
I sure hope the next US president will be a Democrat.

DINO, actually.

[Dolwphin]

The Swamp Strikes Back.

https://twitter.com/i/events/1347651175236079616

[sebby]

I really don't see why in a time of great unrest people are shitting their pants screaming hypocritical and nonsensical right wing talking points bc companies like twitter or amazon have (rightfully) made it more difficult for terrorists to coordinate with one another. For fuck's sake, what is wrong with some people. Is it also big brother limiting free speech if you're thrown out of a public or private building for coming in with some friends and smearing your shit on the walls as you jerk each other off and and are overheard threatening to burn the place down?

Every day my estimate of how many people out there have a ball of old yarn inside their skulls in lieu of a brain goes up up and up. If there are no consequences for plotting or doing grievous harm, grievous harm will continue and will escalate. This is the history of the world, repeating since the dawn of fucking time. Now is the moment where consequences must be passed out to cops and politicians and trump cultists who are making the US a significantly less stable and safe place to be.

[OldAle1]

Because FREE SPEECH or whatever their idiot idea of it is, is more important to many people than literally everything else in the universe. Well, except guns of course.

[sebby]

I feel like a lot of people would gain the world by spending a few hours on Wikipedia. The time to fear the govt is not when they are silencing and jailing voices of irrational extremist violence, but when they silence and jail the voices of artists, workers, ethnic minorities, queer peeps, etc.

[xianjiro]

FBI warns 'armed protests' being planned at all 50 state capitols and in Washington DC

my response

[OldAle1]

FBI warns 'armed protests' being planned at all 50 state capitols and in Washington DC

my response

Yeah I've been seeing shit like that all day, and there's talk about major events on the 17th and 20th. Maybe this first try was just a blind, a run-through?

But IF, and it's a very big IF at this point, the military and national security apparatus are actually on the side of law and order (and reality), I think we'll get through it. I wish I felt any level of confidence whatsoever but I don't.

[RogerTheMovieManiac88]

I really don't see why in a time of great unrest people are shitting their pants screaming hypocritical and nonsensical right wing talking points bc companies like twitter or amazon have (rightfully) made it more difficult for terrorists to coordinate with one another. For fuck's sake, what is wrong with some people. Is it also big brother limiting free speech if you're thrown out of a public or private building for coming in with some friends and smearing your shit on the walls as you jerk each other off and and are overheard threatening to burn the place down?

Every day my estimate of how many people out there have a ball of old yarn inside their skulls in lieu of a brain goes up up and up. If there are no consequences for plotting or doing grievous harm, grievous harm will continue and will escalate. This is the history of the world, repeating since the dawn of fucking time. Now is the moment where consequences must be passed out to cops and politicians and trump cultists who are making the US a significantly less stable and safe place to be.

Ron Paul has been blocked temporarily from FB, for supposedly going against ''community standards'' (despite never receiving a warning).

Russian dissident Alexei Navalny has termed Twitter's silencing of accounts an ''unacceptable act of censorship'' based upon ''emotions and political preferences''. Meanwhile, Chancellor Merkel (hardly a fan of Trump) has called the platform's removal of the President ''problematic''. The Mexican President López Obrador has gone further, saying that social media companies are now a ''world media power'' and ''judges of the Holy Inquisition''.

A handful of pro-free speech organisations have also weighed in, including the ACLU, which said last week that “it should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions — especially when political realities make those decisions easier”.

Do these four people have balls of old yarn inside their skulls, sebby? Or, do they possibly see a bigger picture and a worrying trend towards even greater monopolisation and censorship?

Amazon's decision as to web hosting threatens internet freedom and neutrality. I see it as a dangerous empowerment of Bezos, Cook, etc. that they are now in effect setting themselves up as gatekeepers and guardians.

All the while, most people appear to accept that these chaps are in it out of the kindness in their heart. Really? They want to grow their market share and stocks and sink opposition.

Or, maybe I am batty. The jury's still out...

[xianjiro]

FBI warns 'armed protests' being planned at all 50 state capitols and in Washington DC

my response

Yeah I've been seeing shit like that all day, and there's talk about major events on the 17th and 20th. Maybe this first try was just a blind, a run-through?

But IF, and it's a very big IF at this point, the military and national security apparatus are actually on the side of law and order (and reality), I think we'll get through it. I wish I felt any level of confidence whatsoever but I don't.

see "my response" above

it may fizzle, but then again, too many in law enforcement agree with these various cults or at least are sympathetic. That's part what concerns me and I'm glad I'm no where near a capital.

On the other hand, people might be over cautious after last week much like everyone was tense for months after 9/11. That's not entirely a bad thing. It might also explain why so many are distancing themselves from channels of communication that parrot or participate in such chatter.

I don't know, stuff like this can fizzle because people don't want to risk getting caught up in something that turns ugly. It could also result in outright clashes between the usual suspects and a lot will depend on the policing. But given the wrong encouragement or turning a blind eye, it might get ugly in some places. Only the security agencies can comment on how coordinated the whole thing is and also on the veracity and intent of players involved.

After the melee in August (I think that's when it happened), when the rightists descended on Portland for their Charlottesville on the Left Coast, luckily everyone took it seriously and subsequently not that much happened compared with the predictions of politicians, police officials, protest leaders, etc. The right promised to return monthly but thankfully it never happened. Sure, the locals return now and then, but it's not quite the same thing and protests against police killings have moved to the suburbs where police continue to shoot young men of color and some dealing with severe mental instability and illness. That has kept our most active locals busy in Vancouver USA.

Now if it's those kind of people making noise about the 16th through the 20th are the ones connect to Charlottesville (Unite the Right), and someone in local government decides to blow it off, and someone gets people riled up, well, who knows how bad it will get.

And while I'm not convinced that leftist anarchists used the cover of the Rally for Trump to rampage on the Capitol, my guess is the left will be out on the 16th through 20th and those that have used leftist rallies as cover will also be on the streets.

and we're back to Han.

[PeacefulAnarchy]

LOL.

Free speech, as a legal concept, is not in any way threatened by corporations doing what they've always done and restricting whichever type of speech they deem appropriate for their means.

Free speech, as a social concept, has been under attack forever. The idea that this is somehow different is just whining by those used to having their speech magnified finding out there's someone bigger on the block and they've been complacent in maintaining their own power.

Twitter is a platform for celebrities to pretend to be within reach of their fans. Facebook is a platform for people to connect with each other in an individual manner. The fact that rich people, politicians, journalists and talking heads have attempted and partially succeeded to use these platforms for other means is a) a testament to their existing power and b) a testament to their infinite hubris. Ironically, the biggest whiners are also the ones in the best position to go off and run their own platform. It takes, relatively speaking, very little money to set up and run your own website, and that is well within reach of all of these people.

Amazon and Google are not the only game in town.
Also:

Amazon's decision as to web hosting threatens internet freedom and neutrality. I see it as a dangerous empowerment of Bezos, Cook, etc. that they are now in effect setting themselves up as gatekeepers and guardians.

They have been for years, you only just now happen to care.

[xianjiro]

PA: I, for one, have missed your insight in this this thread. I always find it food for thought.

[RogerTheMovieManiac88]

These Big Tech corporations receive billions in taxpayer subsidies and incentives, so I'm not at all sure that they are really private anymore when their business model relies on public dollars. Parler (which I've never visited and have no wish to) receives no taxpayer support. These companies are more akin to a monopoly and they are the furthest thing from the “free market”, in wanting to maintain their own power and presence.

Just to be clear, I think that there might be very good reason to shut down Parler (if even some of what I heard is true). However, taken on top of Twitter's actions (not only on Trump), it looks like further censorship to me.

If people or companies break the law, I'm all for them being dealt with appropriately.

[RogerTheMovieManiac88]

PA: I, for one, have missed your insight in this this thread. I always find it food for thought.

Me too. I could have done without the ''LOL'' , but I like having my views challenged.

[kongs_speech]

Absolutely anything or anyone promoting Q shit needs to be scrubbed from the web while we still have a world. It's possibly the greatest threat modern civilization has faced. I cannot stress that enough. If you lived here, you'd see it. I've watched so many formerly sane people become zombified by that fucking evil insanity. Hell, I'd gladly squash legitimate free speech (which is not happening with these social networks, to be clear) just to be rid of it.

[PeacefulAnarchy]

These Big Tech corporations receive billions in taxpayer subsidies and incentives, so I'm not at all sure that they are really private anymore when their business model relies on public dollars. Parler (which I've never visited and have no wish to) receives no taxpayer support. These companies are more akin to a monopoly and they are the furthest thing from the “free market”, in wanting to maintain their own power and presence.

Yeah, these big tech corps shouldn't receive tax subsidies. Neither should any other business, and yet here we are. The people most in favour of giving these companies tax breaks are the right wing business class politicians, so they can cry me a river when they find out the hand doesn't scratch back.

A lot of internet stuff should be nationalized be under different rules, but it isn't and this very same US senate and congress that abolished net neutrality with the help of fuckheads appointed by Trump, so this is the world they wanted. They're not angry at the control corporations have, they're angry that corporations have read the room and decided that actually when it comes to social causes the left is where the wind is blowing and where money is to be made. If the people being banned were not them they'd be shouting for joy, as they have in the past.

Just to be clear, I think that there might be very good reason to shut down Parler (if even some of what I heard is true). However, taken on top of Twitter's actions (not only on Trump), it looks like further censorship to me.

What's your definition of censorship? Twitter bans people every day for all sorts of shit that is not illegal. People on the left, people on the right, people who have nothing to do with politics. They, like all hosts of content, bow to pressure because they are businesses and that's what the free market does. When a small group threatens a boycott they don't give a shit, but when there's a big cleave and they're poised to lose a big audience they run the calculations and pick the side they think will make them the most money. It's absolute garbage but, as noted above, it's nothing new and nothing unique to tech.

[RogerTheMovieManiac88]

Absolutely anything or anyone promoting Q shit needs to be scrubbed from the web while we still have a world. It's possibly the greatest threat modern civilization has faced. I cannot stress that enough. If you lived here, you'd see it. I've watched so many formerly sane people become zombified by that fucking evil insanity. Hell, I'd gladly squash legitimate free speech (which is not happening with these social networks, to be clear) just to be rid of it.

Utilise the laws of the land. Update them if necessary. QAnon violence, threat of violence, illegality should of course be prevented and counter-acted.

[PeacefulAnarchy]

Absolutely anything or anyone promoting Q shit needs to be scrubbed from the web while we still have a world. It's possibly the greatest threat modern civilization has faced. I cannot stress that enough. If you lived here, you'd see it. I've watched so many formerly sane people become zombified by that fucking evil insanity. Hell, I'd gladly squash legitimate free speech (which is not happening with these social networks, to be clear) just to be rid of it.

Utilise the laws of the land. Update them if necessary. QAnon violence, threat of violence, illegality should of course be prevented and counter-acted.

How would you reasonably criminalize conspiracy theories and misinformation. The reason people advocate for deplatforming of misinformation is that the government deciding what is acceptable is exactly the true free speech threat that people think is currently happening.

The problem is that the way communication works on the internet is not, despite some people pretending it is, democratized or remotely equal. Like always, those with money and power get their voices amplified. What's different is that psychologically destructive methods of targeting become much more effective on the internet. So, coexisting with the usual powerful are con artists and cult leaders of the modern day. Where before a cult leader had to target individuals one by one or through word of mouth, now they can use algorithms and the law of large numbers to get a following. It doesn't matter if 98% of people think you're ridiculous, because you can access a lot more people at once. The honest don't have means to combat this because speech is not actually democratized, and those tactics work precisely because they are manipulative. Those in power have not done much because a) they fear it will break the illusion of democratized speech which serves them well and b) in some cases, like Trump, they believe they can harness it for their own means.

Could you criminalize coercive and destructive and manipulative speech? Theoretically, yes, but practically it is not feasible and I'm not sure most people all over the political spectrum would be happy with what that would entail. Asking those with the technological power to tell them to fuck off is much cleaner for everyone, because if their speech had actual worth it could survive and thrive on its own. It would take more time without the amplifying power of advertising and algorithm chicanery, but it could still be done. Which is why I don't care if views I support end up being next on the twitter/amazon chopping block, because views I support don't rely on that stuff. Sure twitter and facebook can make it easier, but not having them doesn't make it impossible. Radical and unorthodox views have always found ways to thrive.

[RogerTheMovieManiac88]

These Big Tech corporations receive billions in taxpayer subsidies and incentives, so I'm not at all sure that they are really private anymore when their business model relies on public dollars. Parler (which I've never visited and have no wish to) receives no taxpayer support. These companies are more akin to a monopoly and they are the furthest thing from the “free market”, in wanting to maintain their own power and presence.

Yeah, these big tech corps shouldn't receive tax subsidies. Neither should any other business, and yet here we are. The people most in favour of giving these companies tax breaks are the right wing business class politicians, so they can cry me a river when they find out the hand doesn't scratch back.

A lot of internet stuff should be nationalized be under different rules, but it isn't and this very same US senate and congress that abolished net neutrality with the help of fuckheads appointed by Trump, so this is the world they wanted. They're not angry at the control corporations have, they're angry that corporations have read the room and decided that actually when it comes to social causes the left is where the wind is blowing and where money is to be made. If the people being banned were not them they'd be shouting for joy, as they have in the past.

Just to be clear, I think that there might be very good reason to shut down Parler (if even some of what I heard is true). However, taken on top of Twitter's actions (not only on Trump), it looks like further censorship to me.

What's your definition of censorship? Twitter bans people every day for all sorts of shit that is not illegal. People on the left, people on the right, people who have nothing to do with politics. They, like all hosts of content, bow to pressure because they are businesses and that's what the free market does. When a small group threatens a boycott they don't give a shit, but when there's a big cleave and they're poised to lose a big audience they run the calculations and pick the side they think will make them the most money. It's absolute garbage but, as noted above, it's nothing new and nothing unique to tech.

Thanks for the interesting reply. I'm falling asleep here so forgive the brevity...

I think Trump's administration was totally wrong on their stance on net neutrality. That's obviously an important underlying issue but it's the banning and purging en masse under a veneer of upholding standards and pushing ''social causes'' that causes concern to me.

I was alluding to what I see as increasingly one-sided and draconian censorship.

[PeacefulAnarchy]

Parler (which I've never visited and have no wish to) receives no taxpayer support.

Well, that's debatable.
https://www.thefocus.news/business/john ... net-worth/
However, Matze soon moved on from the confines of regular working hours and teamed up with fellow U of Denver graduate Jared Thompson and conservative donor Rebekah Mercer to found social media network Parler in 2018.

Who's that?
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/15/medi ... index.html
Mercer is the daughter of Robert Mercer, a hedge fund manager and the co-founder of the now-defunct political data-analysis firm Cambridge Analytica. The Mercers have been prominent supporters of President Donald Trump and conservative causes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mercer
Mercer and a former colleague from IBM, Peter Brown, became co-CEOs of Renaissance when Simons retired in 2009.[13] Renaissance's main fund, Medallion, earned 39% per year on average from 1989 to 2006.[7] A bipartisan Senate panel estimated in 2014 that Medallion investors underpaid their taxes by some $6.8 billion over more than a decade by masking short-term gains as long-term returns.

If Bezos used his own money, to do something would that really be different than doing it through Amazon? Legally, maybe. But ethically and functionally? Not really. Parler is just another plaything of the rich and powerful, except the goal was primarily a way of sectioning off and radicalizing an audience instead of solely making money. They still hoped to make money, of course, but indirectly. Which, to be fair, is also how facebook and twitter make their money, just that their approach was a broad of an audience as possible, to embed themselves in the fabric of daily life. The approach of Parler or Fox News is instead a more targeted audience. They give up some money in exchange for a) a more devoted audience that is worth more per person (in terms of advertisers, data buyers, and other schemes) and b) to further their own ideological goals. It's like political donations, except they get to do a little business gambling and hope for profit along the way.

[RogerTheMovieManiac88]

Yeah, just look at me for unorthodox views! I feel positively out of place, haha.

Sorry, I don't have the brainpower to respond more now. I need sleep! Thanks for the cogent and fascinating responses. I find that I admire how you posit your take even while I somewhat disagree with you.

[Dolwphin]

[kongs_speech]

Oh wow, another pearl clutching tweet from a right-wing "journalist." That definitely improved this thread and we're all better for having read it. Awesome perspective that none of us have heard a thousand times in the past few days.

[xianjiro]

I too am tired of the keyboard today and yet still have a big task that needs to get done. It comes the first half of the first month of every year. I hate it, but don't like to wait too long and I'm usually done on the 6th. We know what happened that day ...

Anyway, two articles I found interesting tonight. Forgive the post and flee, but I'm sure these will be in my mind in the days to come. I post here part to be able to reference if the need should arise and part because someone else might (and that's iffy) be interested.

Good night and be well all!

Fringe Groups Splinter Online After Facebook and Twitter Bans

Tracking what may be planned in the coming days could become even more difficult as the groups take to lesser-known networks and apps that can’t be easily monitored.

Parler data breach: Archived posts from Capitol riots could reveal platform's role in the insurrection

[Dolwphin]

Excellent video from Jimmy Dore as usual. When you see Twitter's stated rationale -- and the actual tweets -- the banning of Trump becomes even more ridiculous.

[Dolwphin]

Democrats are really going for it.

[Onderhond]

Twitter is a platform for celebrities to pretend to be within reach of their fans. Facebook is a platform for people to connect with each other in an individual manner. The fact that rich people, politicians, journalists and talking heads have attempted and partially succeeded to use these platforms for other means is a) a testament to their existing power and b) a testament to their infinite hubris. Ironically, the biggest whiners are also the ones in the best position to go off and run their own platform. It takes, relatively speaking, very little money to set up and run your own website, and that is well within reach of all of these people.

I'm sorry, but here you sound like some of these tech-unaware Congress members interviewing Mark Zuckerberg. Regardless of what you may think of these platforms, they harbor big communities that don't just swarm around and being cut off from a platform means being cut off from your community. And the bigger these platforms become, the fewer of them there are to swarm to. As to "building your own site", that's just ludicrous. Unless you're a blogger who doesn't really care for popularity maybe, otherwise you could just as well build your own blimp, fly over cities and shout down what you want to say.

As for the outsider perspective, I think what worries other countries the most is the US' political pendulum and the ability of the right to weaponize the victories of the left, with the fallout of that spreading across at least the Western part of the globe. It's all kinda fine now, but what in 8 or even 4 years time, when we see another Republican becoming president? They better not remember what is happening now.

[Kublai Khan]

Democrats are really going for it.

You really only have a mono-stream of information, don't you?

Republicans tell lies upon lies about "stolen elections" with no proof to the point where people trespass onto the capitol, cause damage, steal stuff, kill people, and terrorize lawmakers.

And all the guy you quote can do is "tut-tut" democrats. What a crock of shit.

[OldAle1]

I hope all of my fellow Americans - or anybody from anywhere else who happens to be in America - remain safe and vigilant over the next 10 days. I just sent my brother an email suggesting he not go anywhere near the VT state capitol over the next 10 days or so; I'm seeing lots of chatter from credible sources about likely attacks on capitols - all 50 state capitols - and I would extend that in my own paranoia to state and federal buildings in general. If you don't have a really good reason to be near or in one of these places over the next couple of weeks, stay away from them!

I am feeling much more paranoid and unsafe now than I did after 9/11 - that happened in a couple of locations, and it seemed likely that any similar terrorism in the near future would be aimed at large cities and events. This seems like something that can and will happen anywhere and everywhere, and it's not clear at this point that law enforcement, national security organizations, or the military are going to have the vigilance and focus they need. In fact I'd say it might well be the opposite. Stay safe everybody!

[Pretentious Hipster]

I did say the flaw of sites like Facebook and Twitter is that they are going into Western interests despite being used internationally. It's slowly starting.

Facebook removed an Iranian news channel

[Dolwphin]

Democrats are really going for it.

You really only have a mono-stream of information, don't you?

Republicans tell lies upon lies about "stolen elections" with no proof to the point where people trespass onto the capitol, cause damage, steal stuff, kill people, and terrorize lawmakers.

And all the guy you quote can do is "tut-tut" democrats. What a crock of shit.

It is 90 % accounts who is overreacting, craving vengeance at all costs; ignoring the massive curtailment of civil liberties and censorship of the discourse. There is no reason to share such material because we already have users in this thread promoting the hegemonic narrative.

Yes the notion of fraudulently claiming a Presidential Election in the US was stolen first arose in 2020. And it is only Republicans who is susceptible to such narratives. And it is only rabid supporters of one side who commit violence. I agree with this brilliant analysis!

He is critical of both sides of the aisle. I am too.