This could be an opportunity for decentralized applications such as the Fediverse, which are not so easy to bring into line. But I fear that the apathy of the majority will make it impossible for people to recognize this alternative, even now. They will not take action on their own, even if it only means showing a little initiative and perhaps giving up some convenience. Instead, people will continue to be lulled into complacency and pretend that everything is fine, thereby forming the widely visible majority that serves as an excuse for their individual irresponsibility.

This vicious circle is the most frustrating thing: All this is only possible because the majority allows it to happen.

I’m sorry, Dave…

I find it remarkable that headlines like these are always phrased passively, as if it were a natural disaster sweeping across the country without anyone being responsible.

Because Musk made a lot of money being Trump’s henchmen.

That’s a good approach.

I myself don’t see progress as a technical thing, but rather technology as something that could help us overcome our animalistic traits in order to enable us to live together in a good, forward-looking way. I mean, of all the mammals in the world, we are the best at building tools, but I wonder if we are making the most of this or if, despite all our tools, we are ultimately incapable of overcoming our instincts.

I don’t know the answer any more than anyone else. However, your answer, which I share, suggests that despite all our technological achievements, we are not evolving significantly, but remain trapped in our animal nature.

Since technology would presumably make it possible for people to no longer have to fight over water sources, I ask.

That’s true, of course — I completely agree with you. It’s just that, with all the news from the US that I read every day, I’ve unfortunately become quite pessimistic.

I’m keeping my fingers crossed that things will turn out alright after all.

I don’t think this would poses much of a additional threat, as the US legal system already appears to operate largely arbitrarily.

I think it’s highly likely that Trump will pursue, deport, or detain other genuine political opponents who are US citizens on the basis of their heritage anyway. Therefore, I assume that this will be a thing regardless. The only difference with Musk would be that even the super-rich would no longer be safe - but hey, I’m sure that the courts will continue to make exceptions for people with deep pockets anyway.

In Germany, pretty much all established parties and even Organizations like the churches do this – without taking the opinion of the population into account in the slightest.

I really wonder what leverage Israel has to achieve this. Instead of decisively condemning all the war crimes, violations of international law, cold-blooded murder, and systematic genocide in light of Germany’s past, our politicians even invoke our “historical responsibility” while aiding and abetting these unspeakable crimes. I simply cannot explain how this is possible, even with arguments that would be remotely plausible, especially since the International Criminal Court has long issued arrest warrants against several members of the Israeli government, which are binding in Germany.

It is a declaration of moral bankruptcy that extends across virtually the entire political system and even into civil organizations.

Only fitting for the guy - everything he does is based on a lie.

It was a 5-4 decision. Thomas agreed with the majority, or rather, his vote constituted the necessary majority.

With this decision the Supreme Court overruled the Florida Supreme Court and effectively stopped the recount of votes, resulting in George W. Bush winning Florida’s electoral votes and thus the presidency. Here you can find a summary.

Whether Al Gore would actually have won with the recount is impossible to say with absolute certainty in retrospect, since the votes were not recounted. However, it was a neck-and-neck race, and numerous indicators suggested that Gore would have won - it was considered likely at the time. And that is precisely why it is scandalous imo that the Supreme Court prevented a manual recount, as this would have made it easy to verify the will of the Florida citizens without any disadvantages.

Overall, I think it’s fair to say that many aspects of this election were rather flimsy.

If you’re interested in the somewhat strange events surrounding this election, you can find the complete documentary “Unprecedented: The 2000 Presidential Election” here. This documentary is a bit sensationalist in places, but it does highlight some of the rather undemocratic methods that were used.

Hope that’s what you were looking for.

Not so fun fact: Even back then, a certain Clarence Thomas was involved in the Supreme Court decision that prevented a recount of votes in Florida (source), which would likely have resulted in Al Gore’s election victory. And: Also even back then, this Supreme Justice was associated with a certain billionaire named Harlan Crow who supported him with various favors - he continues to do so to this day.

That would be desirable, of course, but I wouldn’t count on it.

I’m not concerned with definitions, but rather with people’s opinions. This seems to me especially relevant given that there are many US users here. I’m interested in how they perceive what is happening in the US, what their legal system allows, and whether they consider it just in any way.

I don’t know what you mean by “architecture of westoid regimes” and I don’t think you know either.

It is all besides the point. My question was what you think the purpose of a legal system should be. And all you come up with is that stuff.

I really don’t understand how you can hold that opinion. Your president is clearly a criminal, and he is exploiting your legal system to enrich himself and his partners.

That’s perfectly obvious.

It’s equally obvious that your legal system not only allows this, but also enables this level of massive organized crime in the first place.

Here’s an example: Clarence Thomas, a Supreme Court justice, has been blatantly corrupt for decades (and he’s not the only one in that small circle). The Supreme Court has ruled - in clear violation of the US Constitution - that the law does not apply to the president. So Trump is shamelessly enriching himself.

How can anyone live in such a system and even approve of it?

I just don’t understand what you’re getting at.

China, I assume. You seem to be a staunch communist, although you obviously don’t care what that means. So probably Russia. If I’m wrong: China also has little to do with communism. It’s just that the world’s production is located there, so they have enough money to make people believe that this is a system worth living in.

Whose boots are you licking with your opinions?

Du hast nicht die geringste Ahnung, wovon du redest, mein Freund. Es ist armselig, wie du dich aufspielst ohne auch nur das Geringste zu sagen. Ich kann nur feststellen, dass du vollkommen verblendet bist und damit kaum besser als die Maga-Vögel, die dein Feindbild zu sein scheinen. Das kann ich nicht bewerten, weil mir vollkommen unklar ist, worauf du hinaus willst. Ich kann hier nur einen Social-Media-Troll erkennen - nichts weiter. Geistlos und arrogant - nichts als haltlosen Anschuldigungen und nicht ein eigenständiger Gedanke. Ich nehme an, du repräsentiert .ml. Das ist meines Ermessens der Schandfleck von Lemmy und der Grund weshalb ich meine finanzielle Unterstützung für die Softwareentwicklung eingestellt habe. Eine derart unreflektierte Weltsicht kann ich nicht unterstützen.