I would really rather that these were actual examples, and not conspiracy theories. We all have our own unsubstantiated ideas about what shadowy no-gooders are doing, but I’d rather hear about things that are actually happening.

  • EonNShadow@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    292
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Anyone that says J6 was a “peaceful protest” that “got out of hand”

    We all saw the footage of that day. There were gallows and calls to hang a sitting vice president.

    It was an insurrection, fomented and encouraged by Donald Trump’s speech and actions leading up to that day. Plain and simple.

    The right-wingers who say it wasn’t as serious as it was are gaslighting their base.

    Edit: Victims of gaslighting in my replies

    • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      150
      ·
      11 months ago

      Conversely, anyone who says January 6th was a coup or anything approaching more then a wet fart. We should be so lucky that a fascist police state could be overthrown by 200 disorganized unarmed people walking into the capitol.

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        65
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        The problem wasn’t them getting anywhere near literally overthrowing the entire state, but the fact that they were trying/hoping to kill people.

        • abbenm@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          There’s so many levels on which it is deeply concerning. One is just on the face value. They actually did storm the capital, the security forces in place seemed ambivalent or perhaps actually complicit to some degree. Nevertheless, numerous people were injured or died.

          And then there’s everything about the precedent it sets for next time, the excuses and defenses being made of it, and the ways in which those sympathetic to it may prepare to execute on the same idea again in the future, perhaps learning from prior lessons, and perhaps confident that they won’t face any legal exposure.

          It’s a horrifying idea to have been allowed to take root in the form of real physical actions, which are then carried forward in culture to set the stage for future actions.

      • ulkesh@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        11 months ago

        200? What planet do you live on? Watch a video of it. Read the January 6th Commission report.

        • Piers@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          11 months ago

          On the day it happend I watched the videos being shared by the people participating amongst each other. There were tremendously more than 200 people.

      • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        We should be so lucky that a fascist police state could be overthrown by 200 disorganized unarmed people walking into the capitol.

        It wasn’t just 200 disorganised unarmed people, it was 200 partially-organised partially-armed people with explicit support from the sitting president trying to disturb the proceedings, so the president could carry out his plan to use “alternate electors”.

        Why do people like you always act like the republicans weren’t hoping to capitalise on what happened?

      • minorninth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        11 months ago

        Are you trying to illustrate the point?

        It wasn’t 200, it was 2000.

        And while most did not carry guns, they brought other weapons and armor, and used improvised devices as weapons. And some did bring guns. Source: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/07/28/politics/armed-insurrection-january-6-guns-fact-check/index.html

        Thank God they were poorly organized and that the capitol police resisted…but it’s a complete lie to say it was 200 unarmed people.

        This is all on video! This isn’t a matter of opinion!

  • davel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    219
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    A KGB spy and a CIA agent meet up in a bar for a friendly drink.

    “I have to admit, I’m always so impressed by Soviet propaganda. You really know how to get people worked up,” the CIA agent says.

    “Thank you,” the KGB says. “We do our best but truly, it’s nothing compared to American propaganda. Your people believe everything your state media tells them.”

    The CIA agent drops his drink in shock and disgust. “Thank you friend, but you must be confused… There’s no propaganda in America.”

    • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The Overton Window

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

      A concept where political discourse is slowly shifted to one side or another over time. For example conservatism.

      Politics are talked about the right who move even further right, the centralists are moved to old right and the leftists are moved to the center … the old leftists are now seen as extreme and unacceptable while the far right are also unacceptable but gain some ground … everyone shifts one step to the right and now everything is more conservative.

      The right shift is what is happening now … but it can happen and shift towards the left as well.

      • squiblet@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        A lot of leftists (and I hardly ever saw it before coming on Lemmy) use ‘Liberal’ to mean Classic or Neo Liberal - basically a synonym of capitalist… That’s not at all what it means in American politics, where it means the opposite of Conservative. If we used that definition, Conservatives would be called Liberals as well as Liberals being Liberals, which obviously makes no sense for US lingo. However, they both are Liberals in the neo/classic sense as most US Liberals aren’t calling for communism.

        • IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          The conservatives are only liberal in the economic sense. They are the party of book banning, anti-abortion and anti-lgbtq. Liberalism is also about human rights and freedoms. But just because you think gays should be allowed to marry and acces to have an abortion should be a right that doesn’t put you left on the political spectrum or even make you a progressive. Since that is pretty much a centrist political position in the rest of the world. Most Democrats are liberal in the economic sense but also in the human liberty sense. But only a few Democrats in the house and senate can be truly called progressives. Since most Democrats are fine with the status quo and aren’t pushing society forward. They are just fighting of the attacks of the GOP

        • davel@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          That’s not at all what it means in American politics

          Two red scares and a cold war created an Orwellian memory hole such that Americans don’t even have the words anymore. It’s double-plus ungood.

      • Funderpants @lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Liberal economic theories beleive the free market is the best solution generally, but allow the free market to be intervened in or even entirely supplanted in cases of market failure or where significant social problems arise from private ownership. There is a lot of debate inside liberalism as to when a market has failed, or when a social issue requires intervention, which is why sometimes you will see centrist liberals and left liberals arguing. Just look at Canada with our Liberal Party, its a big tent party with a small social democrat rump(since most social Dems are NDP), a larger social liberal / left liberal group, as well as some centrist and “blue liberals” (these would be right liberals, who are harder to convince about market failures).

        Liberalism can be progressive, especially when the main thrust of a liberal party is left liberal or social liberal. Some Liberal parties are progressive sometimes, then more centrist at others as members and the membership changes over the years (or often on the strength and leanings of their leader). All still liberalism.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      The real lie is the notion that “liberalism” was ever anything other than right-wing to begin with, let alone adjacent to progressivism.

      • pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s only true if you use the international definition of “liberal”. In America, “liberal” means “left wing”. And we’re talking about American politics.

        • Commiejones [comrade/them, he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          In America, “liberal” means “left wing”.

          No it doesn’t. Widespread ignorance does not change objective reality. This sort of thinking is Hyperliberalism. Just because most Americans are politically illiterate doesn’t mean the definition is changed. 40% Americans also believe the entire universe is only 6000 years old.

          If you ask an american political scientist to define “liberal” they will tell you the “international” definition. If you allow technical and scientific terms to be subjected to “language just evolves” you end up with a Tower of Babble type situation where different groups of people are unable to communicate with one another despite using the same language and society collapses.

          • pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            If you ignore the actual usage of words then you’re speaking your own language and talking only with your own in-group bubble.

            This was not a conversation about the political science term “liberal”. It is about lies told to everyone. We’re obviously discussing common usage.

            • Commiejones [comrade/them, he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              We’re obviously discussing common usage.

              Saying something is obvious doesn’t make it true. The only noun you use in your first comment is “Democrats” so how is this not a discussion about politics? I am having a discussion about politics and I’m going to do my best to use political terminology in its established scientific meaning not a niche dialect that you believe is “common use.”

              The world is much bigger than the USA. Americans only make up 15% of the English speaking world. What you call “common use” is just “ignorant and wrong” to the rest of us.

    • leftzero@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      By any civilized standard democrat politicians are far right extremists (a few token exceptions are closer to right or even center-right on some points, but they have little effect on the whole). Republicans are outright deranged lunatics, mixed with a worryingly increasing percentage of fascists.

    • taladar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      58
      ·
      11 months ago

      On a related note the whole notion extremely prevalent in the UK that all they have to do is decide they want to rejoin and it will happen. No matter which side of that a commentator is on, they almost never mention that they need to present something the EU27 actually want and convince them that the UK is not the ‘break international agreements’ kind of country any more. Overall the British still all seem to think that they are something better than everyone else and others have to do what they want and have no real agency.

    • PeterLossGeorgeWall@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      The idea that they could leave and somehow get better trade deals, especially with European countries. The EU is the deal! It’s a trade agreement that favors the participants, how could they ever get a better deal?? What’s baffling is that a lot of older people voted for it and they can actually remember when the UK joined the EU. That means they realize that the UK joined for the deal but somehow that’s worth nothing.

      • breadsmasher@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        A lot of those older people are racist and blame foreigners for literally every problem, and continuously vote against themselves

  • dellish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    130
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Vaccines will give you autism, microchips, actual diseases etc. It’s one of the best medical breakthroughs in history and we have idiots ruining it.

    • Azzu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I got the vaccine and currently have autism, microchips and an actual disease! Checkmate!

      Though I’m pretty sure they’re all not connected to each other.

        • Azzu@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          “vaccines will give you microchips” - nowhere does it say that the microchips will be given to me in a way that they end up in me. Maybe they’re just a nice side present that comes in the same box as the vaccine.

          “I […] currently have […] microchips” - nowhere does it say I have them in me, just that I have them. I have them in my desktop computer, phone, and other electronical devices, and I’ve currently not shoved my smart dildo up my ass, so all outside me.

  • notannpc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    110
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The concept of trickle down economics. Anyone with a functioning brain can tell you that it would never work. But somehow people as a whole in the US still think giving corporations and rich cunts extra money, and tax breaks somehow lead to the 99% reaping a benefit.

    It has never been true because the basic function of capitalism is to get as much money as possible, while spending the least amount of money to do it. There’s no room for passing on the extra profits to your employees, clients, or vendors.

  • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    110
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    Republican talking points. All of them. Pick literally anything they say about guns or economics. Literally anything.

    • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      It’s wild how unburdened they are by having to conform to observable reality, they can just go nuts and say whatever. Jewish space lasers? Fuck it, why not, throw some alien clones in there too

    • chitak166@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Raising wages just causes prices to go up faster.

      Unfortunately, they’re right about this one because democrats are in on it too.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      It has a name: American exceptionalism. It’s used both by people who know it’s a lie and by people who believe it.

    • Rooskie91@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Most of what people believe about America’s history is post WWII mythmaking and revision. It’s a shame because the labor movement in America has a fascinating history, and we’re about to relive it.

        • Rooskie91@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Can’t wait to be teabagged by a Boston Dynamics robo dog after it murders my whole family for paying my Amazon Prime 2 days late!

      • bermuda@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Not even that. Politicians in even just the generation after Washington deified the framers of the Constitution, even when the remaining alive ones protested against it.

  • RandomVideos@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    95
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    Communism=Authoritarianism

    I was taught in school the characteristics of authoritarianism and a couple weeks later, when i was being taught about communism, the same characteristics were said

  • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    “Your socioeconomic status is a measure of work ethic, sacrifice, and ability to make good decisions. Poor people deserve to be poor, and suffer, for making bad decisions.”

    Birth lottery which includes not just wealth but family connections is the biggest metric. We are way down the list of developed nations in terms of upward mobility. Only the outliers that prove to be of the greatest service to entrenched capital are granted entry. Most Americans, religious or not, have internalized the dogma of the prosperity gospel, itself an absolute parody of the dogma of Christianity it claims to be part of.

    Go to any local fast food restaurant at rush hour, hell, go to any produce field at harvest, and tell me how much that studious hard work pays off. conversely, please regail me with tales of how hard it is to be a capital landlord, making investments gambling with insider information with capital gained from previous exploitations, and then merely expecting an endless steam of capital for NO labor into what generated it. It’s like we were conquered by the traveling snake oil salesmen of old.

    It’s called the American Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it.

    • NutWrench@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      11 months ago

      Also known as “prosperity gospel.” The religious justification for obscene wealth. The basic idea is that if you are rich, it’s because God has chosen you to BE rich because you are morally superior to everyone else. It’s an absolute perversion of Jesus’ teaching in the New Testament.

    • creamed_eels@toast.ooo
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      11 months ago

      A while ago I read Bezos was posed a question about why he isn’t using his money and power to help impoverished people. IIRC he replied with something along the lines of “oh, we did a study and poverty is a moral failing, it can’t be solved, now if you’ll excuse me I have to go buy a dick-shaped rocket”

      Ok, I made the rocket part up but you get the idea, Jeff Bezos is a pos

    • Akasazh@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Is that last sentence a quote from George Carlin? I’ve heard that one before.

  • lhx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    If you cut taxes on the rich it will benefit everyone.

  • calypsopub@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    Rising early and going to bed early is more virtuous than rising late and going to bed late.