78
"This enforcement began in the immediate aftermath of the incident, as part of our standard practice to address content related to violent tragedies."
Tragedy is a strong word.
Social Media Moderators working for billionaires struggle to alter narrative around Luigi Mangione at behest of scared billionaires
ftfy
So? Stop moderating! Do something else!
Cry about it.
Mangione has been charged with first-degree murder "in furtherance of terrorism," which may clarify things for platforms about whether to consider him as a single accused murderer or an alleged terrorist when it comes to content policy.
Convict him of that shit first, otherwise you're just allowing the government to dictate moderation policies. He's only being charged with terrorism so the state can murder him. I'm not saying anti-terror policies are bad in general, but this is abuse of the system.
otherwise you’re just allowing the government to dictate moderation policies
I think that's what they're trying to do. They're trying to manipulate how this particular memeplex is being circulated from person to person as an information control measure. They don't want this idea catching on.
The fact that Luigi has not been convicted seems to be being treated as an irrelevant technicality by the media in this matter. Interesting given how scrupulous they usually are in dropping "alleged" everywhere.
Too bad Luigi isn't a cop, then they might have given him a slap on the wrist and a description of events in the media that read "last night the trigger of Luigi's self defense weapon caused ignition in the barrel which resulted in a bullet being ejected at high speed. Healthcare provider and loyal family man Brian Thomson was tragically caught in the path of the (*several) bullets. Authorities are investigating the bullets to determine their motive."
You forgot the paid administrative leave.
They won’t change that stance. I’m sure it’s a direct order from Rupert Murdoch or one of the other five people that owns all news media here.
They want to shut it down bc they don’t want anyone thinking about all of the harm they’ve caused in their pursuit of wealth.
IANAL, this is not legal advice
"Terrorism" has a wide meaning, as in any action that may instill fear in some target.
Texting your ex that "I'm at your address with a knife with your name on it", is condidered terrorism. Shooting your neighbor's dog as a "message" to your neighbor, is considered terrorism. Murdering a CEO with a message to other CEOs and anyone working in an entire industry, is considered terrorism.
If BLM people played their cards right, they probably could sue many instances of racial profiling for terrorism.
For more information, and some other educational situations (both direct and indirect) about the day-to-day of US judiciary, check Judge Fleischer TV
Texting your ex that "I'm at your address with a knife with your name on it", is condidered terrorism.
I don't think it is in any sane country. IANAL though so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
IANAL either, in recent streams from Judge Fleischer (Houston, Texas, USA) there have been some cases (yes, plural) where repeatedly texting a victim with life threats, or even texting a victim's friend to pass on a threat to the victim, have been considered a "terrorist threat".
As for the "sane country" part... 🤷... but from a strictly technical point of view, I think it makes sense.
I once knew a guy who was married to a friend, and he had a dog. He'd hit his own dog to make her feel threatened. Years went by, nobody did anything, she'd come to me crying, had multiple miscarriages... until he punched her, kicked out of the car, and left stranded on the road after a hiking trip. They divorced, went their separate ways, she found another guy, got married again, and nine months later they had twins.
So... would it've been sane to call what the guy did, "terrorism"? I'd vote yes.
Also by this author
When your entire career is nothing more than licking boots i guess eating glue is an improvement 🤷♂️
You think when these journalists keep expressing "confusion" about why the public loves Luigi, are they just pretending to not understand? Or perhaps they're so fucking cooked that they can't see things from the perspective of the class that they're in?
They also have to keep their editors happy. One of an editor's jobs is to push back on the folks who write articles, and occasionally rewrite parts of them. And the editors have folks above them in the food chain pulling the strings. News companies aren't monoliths, they're spiderwebs of people pushing and pulling on other people because there are obligations all over the place.
To put it another way, "You can't say that or you're fired. You'll never work in this city again." And, because there aren't many celebrity journalists, it's a very real risk.
Sadly, "you'll never work in this city again" has been true for my entire career. What are you going to do? Walk across Main Street to the other paper?
But it has never been an editor's job to "push back on the folks who write articles," which I thought would be the worst part of that sentence; literally, rewriting is what editors do. We don't push back on staff, we push back on copy. A minor omission here, a glaring hole there, and -- as a last resort -- spiking a story until questions are answered.
No one has felt any job security in this industry for at least 15 years. "You can't say that" probably cuts both ways at this point.
Thats something i wonder too. My answer is that many of the unwilling participants within capitalism are delusional and believe that they are capitalists when being a capitalist means you would have capital so that means these people are nothing more than exploited workers with severe Stockholm syndrome. People like this writer believe they are just temporarily embarrassed billionaires
Hardly unique to people living under capitalism though. Most people tend to identify with the system they are living under, including systems that are much worse than ours.
Capitalism is the only system that promises people the ultra slim a d unlikely chance to become as wealthy as those who exploit the poor. what systems, besides capitalism in third world countries are worse than capitalism at its core? Where greed and ruthlessness are praised above virtuous ethical pursuits
Explains why so many people don't seem to have consciences anymore, doesn't it?
The obvious answer is that every single attempt at communism has produced far worse economic, environmental, developmental and ethical results than capitalism - while at the same time loudly promising to make everyone equal and happy. Isn't it worse to promise freedom and decent life to everyone - instead of just the chance of "making it big" - and then completely failing at everything while limiting every kind of personal freedom and right, including the one of being the architect of your own happiness? It's not even a competition.
I also highly doubt you would argue that the other side of the autocratic coin - Fascist systems with human rights abuses and poor ethics that are comparable to the worst communist systems on one hand, with usually completely incoherent economic policies on the other hand - are any better. Neither are absolutist monarchies.
Capitalism is highly flawed, no doubt, but if we look at the countries on this planet that are the most successful in terms of economics, equality, personal freedom, human rights, etc. then we find countries that made it work through regulation and strong government institutions. We should try and learn from those and use the slow nature of democratic change to tweak and improve our societies and economics based on what they have shown to work in the real world.
but if we look at the countries on this planet that are the most successful in terms of economics, equality, personal freedom, human rights, etc. then we find countries that made it work through regulation and strong government institutions
Yeah that's socialism. The best societies were all degrees of socialist, this includes western Europe and the USA at its mid-century peak. These societies all had aggressive, borderline confiscatory progressive taxation, large scale government intervention in the economy (in the US especially aggressive anti-trust), a generous social welfare state, and a large and professionalized civil service.
They also had large and well-organized labor unions capable of wielding power on behalf of their members and disrupting plans of the elites.
Remove those things and you quickly slide into a dystopian fascist nightmare state as the US and parts of Europe like the UK are discovering.
You're forgetting that these countries also have among the highest economic freedom in the world, protect personal property and investments, provide a stable and reliable environment to conduct very capitalist business. The economic system is capitalist, not socialist. There is no planned economy, most industries are in private hands. Strong regulation keeps capitalist excesses in check as you've correctly identified, while the high taxation levels the playing field by financing a robust safety net and other government services everyone benefits from.
In Germany, the term for this kind of system is social market economy, with social being a qualifier and market economy the system.
So, still not Capitalism tho
Only a Sith deals in absolutes. Nearly every real-world economic system sits somewhere on a spectrum instead of neatly slotting into one category only.
Sure, but the difference is that they (European countries) do not profess to be staunch Capitalists (and staunchly anti-Socialist), whereas by large America does. That is a big difference, because it informs policy drastically. There's a reason we're much much closer to a corporate oligarchy than European nations are, and it's our idealization of a system that literally is based around Corporatism.
America is the one dealing in absolutes. "Are you or have you ever been a member of...", "better dead than Red", etc.
and [not] staunchly anti-Socialist
This is incorrect. When the concept of the social market economy was first brought to the public attention by the conservative German CDU in the late 1940s, it was meant to be a counterpoint to the "unsocial command economy". Being staunchly anti-Socialist was a core policy of most large democratic parties in Western-European countries, not just West-Germany, as a reaction to the massive and very close threat from the East. Relations only began to thaw in the 1970s, only for the Cold War to heat up in the 1980s.
Yes, I know, this is the past and today, things are different in terms of rhetoric on the old continent, but this was when the economic systems that are still in place today were created.
the concept of the social market economy... in the late 1940s
I feel like we're glossing over important parts of 1800s European history, and it being the literal birthplace of Socialism and Anarchism as philosophies, to just go to the 1940s emergence of the postwar Western Europe economies. The backlash against Monarchism and mercantile economies saw a lot of support for all sorts of new forms of government in the 1800s, and various forms of Socialism were chief among them and incredibly well liked and influential among citizens.
That it took 2 world wars shattering the remaining vestiges of the mainland European monarchic powers (who were very anti-Socialist for obvious reasons), and allowed Socialist ideas about the responsibilities of government to its peoples to actually take hold at a government level, is a story about Monarchic influence clinging to power against the will of its people until being forced out, not about citizenry being anti-Socialist.
And yes, that reticence is very much a thing of the past now, and most Europeans are vocally proud of their social programs and their societies' focuses on social welfare and community.
And the massive amounts of resources expended bu capitalist super powers to ensure those awful economic conditions isn’t the reason for them? 🤡 What about lybia, burkina faso and cuba before the ussr fell? Youre seriously just parroting anti socialist propaganda. Capitalism came to be the domination economic model in the 1600’s took control of half the world and immediately began searching for new markets to exploit while perpetuating warfare for profit, slavery to maximize profits and genocides to stifle any resistance or perpetuate the values of eugenics and racism but yeah communism is bad because of famine and people aren't allowed work really hard to become wealth hoarding billionaires while a large subset of the population live in squalor to support such opulent lifestyles of luxury
Break down the word capitalism and it tells you all you need to know. The intransitive verb at the root, to capitalize, is synonymous with “to exploit” and “to take advantage” the only time American capitalism ever allowed the working class to thrive was a brief moment of 4 decades after FDR legislated socialist policies to protect the working class from severe limitless exploitation and now legislation has been passed since that has rendered that progress irrelevant.
Also fascism is capitalism in decline and monarchy is irrelevant because we are talking economic models. And monarchies that were not capitalist were feudalist which is just a less refined version of capitalism.
Youre seriously just parroting anti socialist propaganda
How utterly predictable.
Capitalism came to be the domination economic model in the 1600
Mate, stop reading Marx like a history book. Seriously. Captitalism wasn't a thing yet and has many differences from the mercantilism of that time period, including importantly that it existed within a completely different system instead of encompassing all or even most of the economies of the time - and the wars of conquest, subjugation and extermination of other people was not a new invention of the colonial era. How is that any different from what e.g. Roman or Arab conquerors did centuries earlier, just to name two?
perpetuating warfare for profit, slavery to maximize profits and genocides to stifle any resistance or perpetuate the values of eugenics and racism
Are you even remotely aware of the crimes of Mao and Stalin? Their body counts doing exactly that far exceeds everyone else's - but they did it under that red star you like so much, so it's all right.
but yeah communism is bad because of famine
You never had to worry about your next meal, correct? I'm getting the distinct impression that you can't even comprehend the horrors of e.g. the Holodomor or the Great Leap Forward. Yes, man-made famines are actually bad and communism is responsible for a few of those (which are also among the worst famines in all of human history) - or is that "anti socialist propaganda" as well? Was it Capitalist saboteurs, national-republican agitators or kulaks who were actually responsible?
while a large subset of the population live in squalor to support such opulent lifestyles of luxury
Ever seen Stalin's dacha compared to the communal block houses that the ordinary Soviet citizen had to live in at the time, poorly heated, cramped homes where many families lived in the same apartment, with not an ounce of privacy or dignity? The gap between those two was far greater than between the average e.g. French home and a French leader's home under evil capitalism right now. Hell, someone living on welfare in any Western European country 50 years ago was already enjoying a higher standard of living than your average Socialist worker could even dream of at the time.
Break down the word capitalism
Now you're getting ridiculous.
the only time American capitalism ever allowed the working class to thrive was a brief moment of 4 decades after FDR legislated socialist policies
You're so close to getting it, it hurts. Remember that part about tweaking and improving our societies and economics to counter the weak aspects of capitalism? Roosevelt did precisely that to counter the fallout of the Great Depression, which was a direct result of unregulated market capitalism. He was not a Socialist, far from it, but he recognized what worked.
It is also incredibly important to mention that the benefits of his economic policy were highly segregated. Whites were first in line, every time. This was not an attempt at egalitarianism.
Also fascism is capitalism in decline and monarchy is irrelevant because we are talking economic models.
You can not be serious. Fascism is noteworthy for not having any clearly defined economic policies, but if there is one thing it definitely does is meddle with the economy to a far greater greater degree than what capitalists are comfortable with. At the same, time, Nazism in particular was aligned with some (but far from all) big business interests and implemented a significant number of privatization efforts. Also at the same time, the Nazis were deeply suspicious of, among other things, free international trade and the stock market, core pillars of capitalism. It's complicated.
And monarchies that were not capitalist were feudalist which is just a less refined version of capitalism.
No, you can't just attach the "capitalism" label to economic systems you don't like and clearly don't understand. Feudalism - from an economic perspective - is closer to the moneyless utopia of true socialism.
The only thing missing from your comment is that any kind of socialist country that has already existed wasn't actually true Socialism and thus doesn't count. If I hadn't mentioned it, it would have likely come up eventually, because you're seriously doing nothing but frantically churning out every clichéd talking point that you can remember about this topic (edit: the reply is even worse).
The only thing predictable is the pro capitalist propaganda points coming from you The ccp is not communist, its state owned capitalism. And russia hasn't been the ussr since 1989 but it is authoritarian. But so is the usa.
You sound like a billionaire bootlicking propaganda fountain.
Any crimes of humanity you use to demonize communism and socialism i can name far worse criminality perpetrated by capitalist regimes.
How many millions of children go without dinner every night in America alone? Capitalism aims to deprive people of resources so a small few can live in opulent luxury and spend more on weekend vacations than you could earn in a dozen consecutive lifetimes. And you are incorrect i have endured food insecurity. But yay america and capitalism because anyone can just pull themselves up by the bootstraps if they can just allow themselves to be treated like a disposable automaton to earn peanuts while being degraded so someone can take in passive income on their back.
Also fascism is inherently anti communist. What are you going to tell me next that the Nazi’s were socialist because they had the word socialist in their description? Who were the first group of people hitler vilified and sent to the labor camps? Oh right! The communists 🤣 fascism is primarily marked by the intersection of economic and military industry in control of the governing and media apparatuses. With characteristics such as the suppression of labor power, the protection of corporste power, sexism, obsession with national security and militsrism, unification around a common scapegoated enemy, disdain for intellectuals and artists, disdain for human rights, religious ideals intertwined with government, militarized police, obsession with crime and punishment, blatant cronyism, nepotism and corruption. The only one of the traits of fascism that America can claim plausible deniability on is fraudulent elections but anyone witj a brain can see our whole political system is owned by the wealthy. A princeton study showed unequivocally that the amount of influence a person has on policy is directly related to their economic status with a vast majority of the population who arent multi millionaires having a statistical near zero effect on any issue regardless of how popular or unpopular it may be to the boting general public.
And at least stalin wasn't murdering and starving innocents to increase shareholder dividends.
Authoritarianism is bad but if i had to choose ill take the one where the regime makes an effort to ensure the citizens needs are met, as opposed to maintaining high profits so billionaires can buy more yachts and lobbyists to bribe politicians legally. whats the homelessness rate in cuba today? Oh yeah it’s virtually non existent meanwhile the us has the highest rate of homelessness and suicide since the gilded age and great depression. And also cuba such a socialist shithole as you would undoubtedly claim, still managed to innovate a vaccine to prevent lung cancer that is so effective the US had to begrudgingly admit it existed and work with the researchers who developed it to bring it to market in the usa where it is currently undergoing clinical trials (at a snails pace since the American capitalist health insurance cartels have zero interest in providing a cure for any cancer)
Everything in capitalism is commoditized including the suffering and death of those who are adversely affected by a system that rewards greed and lacks humanity. One of many cases in point being the war on drugs which has turned America into a fascist police state. We are conditioned to believe prohibition is continuing to erradicste the supply and demand of narcotics. Meanwhile the supply and demand have only grown since the war on drugs began and in reality the only things these laws do are increase the black market value of narcotics making them more profitable for socially elite bulk distributors, while commoditizing the poor mental health issues and suffering of those living in our capitalist system who are seeking escape and relief through self medication, to keep prisons at maximum occupancy and increase the profits of prison industrial profiteers. While the public are propagandized to support these blatantly authoritarian fascist laws that make things worse so more resources can be diverted to the police force who maintain racist attitudes mainly due to these drug prohibition laws which were all built upon the most racist and ignorant ideas of the early 20th century. And it also leads to the evolution of the market so now the majority of the illicit opiod supply is tainted with fentanyl analogues because its easier to smuggle something uktra potent and that reduces risk, so thank you DEA for the increase in overdoses and all the fentanyl in the black market supply. All of this is not only absurd and mindless its blatantly unconstitutional and illegal for several reasons. But again America is a capitalist empire in decline exhibiting severe symptoms of fascism.
Plus You had nothing to say of burkina faso and libya which were both successful until western capitalist powers assassinated their leaders and installed far right capitalist regimes. So much for “socialism always fails” if that were the case why is so much spent to ensure its failure? And all that man made famine you speak of, you fail to leave out who were responsible for the lack of food resources resulting from insurgent action by capitalist aggressors
And I understand feudalism. Its a system where the ultra wealthy act as landlords for an arbitrary amount of the crops and goods produced on their land but then that devolved into paying rent and if not one was charged as a criminal for stealing the resources of the land they lived on. Capitalism as it is today ultimately eroding all the socialist protections fdr legislated through the FLSA of 1938, has devolved into a system of neo feudalism. It is a fact that it cost more to purchase and maintain slaves under chattel slavery than Americans earning mininum wage anywhere in the country today are currently compensated.
Hopefully this shit backfires on the platforms like fuckin crazy.
Doesn't look like it. My impression at least is that the whole story has mostly died down already in the frenzied news and social media landscape. The chaos and carnage of the upcoming Trump administration will dominate the news for the foreseeable future and do the rest. There will be a brief uptick in attention during the trial, but that's about the most I would expect.
If Luigi lives that long. We have a betting pool at work going that gives it 5:1 that he'll be a Texas suicide.
this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2025
78 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37825 readers
983 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS