• 5 Posts
  • 1.09K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 30th, 2023

help-circle





  • Nope, the wealth inequality makes them sociopaths too…

    It’s a hard reality, but if me or you had Elon’s net worth, we’d be just as fucking weird and just as dangerous to everyone else.

    Like, as much as people say it, people don’t realize how much just a single billion is. Just a single billion is enough to fuck up anyone. Like 100 million, some people might be able to remain relatively normal. But a billion would get us all.

    What you’re doing is the same as writing of the Nazi movement as Germans being intrinsically violent or sociopathic. When obviously that shit can happen anywhere.

    It’s just a very hard truth to face, so we rationalize by saying “those people” were born evil.

    No one is inherently good, just some people are properly socialized to be “good”. And we need to accept that so we stay vigilant against it.



  • Pay morally bankrupt actresses to dress up as a videogame chare ter for sex work then leak the photo to brag about it…

    Then probably all the shit Dubai princes do.

    That level of money will fuck you up, because not just the human brain, but damn near every living organism is wired to always want more.

    No matter what kind of thing you find enjoyable, if you have acces to it 24/7 then your going to get bored and move onto something more extreme.

    Why do you think all these old rich/powerful people become rapists and child molesters?

    It’s not that they were necessarily born evil, this is just the “natural result” of someone having this insane level of wealth inequality. Which honestly doesn’t even.make the top ten lists of why we need to address wealth/power inequality, but like…

    Certainly topical when trump won’t release the Epstein list because it says he raped kids.



  • except in the case there is no source or there assertion it is a genocide is “seriously contested”.

    I think a big part of this, is how Wikipedia was never meant to be a source for developing news…

    Like, 1943 the nazis would have seriously contested any of the multiple genocides that were committed. Or US/Canadian treatment of their Indigenous populations at the time.

    But it’s “logic” like in actual logic classes in college.

    They could have 37 different examples of how what Israel is doing meets a definition of genocide, with video evidence, and a list of everyone who says it’s a genocide…

    But their job isn’t to draw the conclusion, it never was.

    And I get wanting Wikipedia to say it is, because it undeniably is.

    But the opposite of biased reporting isn’t biasing it the other way. It’s counterintuitive, but it’s easier to hold onto a nonbiased organization than one biased in your direction. The pendulum swings faster the higher up it is. You can’t push it the way you want it to go, you have to hold it as still as possible.



  • which would also apply to other accepted genocides

    Can you give me an example where despite lots of evidence of genocide, there’s not been an international ruling declaring genocide yet Wikipedia still says it’s a genocide?

    To me, that would be the smoking gun that this was a biased move.

    But what he is saying now is how it should always be. Throw all the evidence and sources up there, and make it clear that it hasn’t been ruled a genocide yet officially, maybe even have a section on how that process has been going and who’s opposing it.

    That would be how to do it right.