Already the most disliked man in America, Zuckerberg will show with his next era whether he believes in anything as much as he does power. Was his interest in jiu-jitsu mixed martial arts authentic or a way to ingratiate himself with the manosphere’s podcast hosts? We may know by the time he faces his first inquest. Perhaps he’ll return to the liberal roots of his former public image like founding a pro-immigration nonprofit, as he did a decade ago.
They will cozy up to Democrats, and celebrate on stage with them when they take the Presidency.
In return for all of that “coziness” (i.e. donations), Democrats will continue their longstanding policy of not returning to pre-Reagan taxation for corporations and the wealthy (a 50-year tradition)
They’ll pretend they’re progressive again
If Zuckerberg is so disliked, why do so many idiots still use Farcebook?
If Trump is so disliked, why do so many people still drive on public roads and send mail via the USPS?
Uhhh, cuz idiots?
We can’t afford to forget about bot accounts. Social media and the internet in general is vastly polluted by non-human accounts trying to manipulate you directly and through your algorithm. Also it’s a literal addiction engine; yeah people on it are flawed and unaware fo themselves and harms they’re exposed to, and also the site is designed to exploit them to the tune of billions of dollars in psychological research. So don’t forget how evil it is when you want to blame the (human) users, it is in part victim blaming. Also, don’t forget Zuckerberg did this all with intent when you see his pasty robotic ass dragged in for depositions to explain himself.
Add rainbows
Yeah, Target’s Pride section this year is gonna be lit af.
I encourage you to read up on The Terror.
All of those tens of thousands of guillotine victims weren’t wealthy. Not even close. They were you and me. Only a tiny few were wealthy.
Recommend “Paris in the Terror” by Loomis.
I’m not down for murdering folks without due process. That being said, if one dispassionately measures the good done vs the harm caused, throwing every billionaire into the sea — even the “good ones” — the math suggests more good would be done then harm. Sometimes it’s difficult to reconcile the morality of not murdering them.
We need a shitload of Luigis to take the moral hit, leaving the rest of us to be innocently outraged. I, for one, would be the first to write a sternly worded online comment.
“If some good ones die, fuck it, the lord will sort em.”
-RTJ (RIP for being sell outs)
I have a suggestion for them: they can go fuck themselves.
They’ll cozy up to the Dems. It’s not rocket science. All the corporations pay both parties to further their interests, due to the most idiotic ruling in history: citizens united, which effectively decided that legally in the US, money = speech.
We’ll see what Vivian has to say about that…
It’s known as a plutocracy … a political system based on money and wealth
As compared to a democracy … a political system based on the will of the people.
America has always worked like the first and it’s debated as to whether or not it ever was the second.
Just in case anyone is curious as to what you mean, here’s a brief historical context.
Up until Trump and adjusting for inflation, George Washington was the wealthiest president in history with his net worth contributing an actual percentage of the US wealth at the time. I mean, we were still getting national loans to the tune of a few million dollars per deal and that was considered adequate at the time.
Jefferson used the White House as his personal palace while he was President and spent as much time throwing dinner parties and receiving guests in his dressing gown as being President and trying to undo everything Hamilton left behind out of pure spite.
It wasn’t until damn near Lincoln (1828) that your average man was able to vote, as only those who owned land were considered educated enough to have a say in government, and when Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation we had the “who can vote” conversation all over again, and then once more and with feeling for the women after that.
“The arc of history moves towards progress”
We might take a couple steps backwards for every few steps we take forward, but no one can deny that we have moved forward.
I’m in Canada and I have this debate often with my friends. One prime example is our federal governments Westminster system of government … where we have a house of parliament filled with elected officials from across the country, who can draw up, debate issues and pass laws … but then those laws are sent to a senate that provides ‘a sober second thought’ to everything … the senate is filled with unelected officials that are placed there by appointment.
Historically, the senate was just filled with friends and associates by the ruling government at the time … basically it meant that every democratic law in the country was first given over to unelected elites and business friendly people to water down anything that went through government … in recent decades, they’ve modernized the system and now it is still appointed people but appointed through a system disassociated with individual political parties or political leaders - apparently senators are appointed by committee
But its still filled with heavily influential people with money and monied interests … they keep arguing that any canadian citizen can be appointed but it never happens because you have to be a fairly wealthy individual, have influence and know lots of people before you could ever be considered for appointment … one of the prerequisites they point out is that individuals considered for appointment must own a minimum wealth of $4,000 (or something like that, I forget the actual figure but it was only a few thousand dollars), which most will argue is not a barrier to many in this day in age. What they don’t point out is that $4,000 in 1867 when the country was founded was equivalent to saying someone should own roughly almost a million dollars in wealth. It was always geared and built into the system to have wealthy overseers watch over the country and protect the wealth of the most powerful people.
Which makes you question, like I do with America, whether we ever did have a democratic system here in Canada
Dems have a fuckton more house clearing to do before billionaires need to worry about a fucking thing, but at least it will go faster now because a lot more Dems will need to vote against in order to prevent passage, instead of the one-off “take one for the team” carousel of status-quo enablers.
Hopefully the Democrats won’t chicken out and regulate the fuck out of them. Break Google, Meta, X, all of them up. Tax the fuck out of them.
They will agree, after much donation, that regulation is needed.
The regulation will protect current asset holders and IP rights, while limiting its utility to the individual and creating moats to competitors. They will do this by fear mongering buzz words like “national security” and “think of the children”.
Meanwhile the wealthy already have the hardware and open models to run whatever shady BS they want, while the consumer will get to rent the highly regulated corporate controlled versions that harvest your data and tell you what they want you to know.
They won’t do shit
they’ll just do pride month again
Maybe they might throw in some performative internal bullshit too like a DEI book club.
thrive, probably. Unless the people don’t just lap each others’ backs for the voting job well done.
Despite a nationwide blue wave in the midterm election, California’s much-debated billionaire tax didn’t get the support many expected in one of the country’s most liberal states.
Americans voted blue the the oligarchy is still doing fine.
I hope part of the answer is pay more in taxes.
I’m wondering if they’ll deliberately hit the button that pops the AI bubble during this Congress to try and convince people that progressives can’t manage the economy
The same thing
