The "both sides" argument is one of the fascists' favorite ways to inspire voter apathy, maybe take a second to think about harm reduction instead of focusing only on your own moral superiority.
Also, I'm not American, I have never voted in a US election.
To remind people that their actions have consequences and that they need to take an active role in the democratic process if they want to preserve it.
Well, no, tariffs are import taxes, whoever imports the product to the country pays for it, the exporter does not.
Don't mistake Ukraine's ability for self-defense as Putin's mercy.
Biden was not nearly critical enough towards Israel, he did not stop supplying them with weapons, but it seemed like he was at least not happy with what Netanyahu is doing. Trump, on the other hand, is very clear in his explicit approval and practically daring Israel to do more. There is a difference.
Both are bad, both are wrong, but even you have to be able to see that one option is worse than the other.
Him pouring gasoline on the fire sure as shit didn't help.
"I'm for euthanasia but I think we need to introduce it in a way that doesn't reduce access to healthcare"
What part was negated?
I don't think Trump is as much of a lackey that's following the plan as he is a useful idiot that's easy to manipulate. I believe that Trump believes that the US is the biggest and the best - it suits the same image he has of himself as the biggest and best leader - but he's so dumb and narcissistic that he won't realize that he's being led on a leash.
I don't think Trump consciously wants to destroy America, I think he wants to make it what he considers to be great (a militarily powerful dictatorship built on worshiping him), but he's absolutely fine with making it weaker in the interim if it either:
A. Makes him gain something
B. Feeds his ego
People who say "This is just a distraction" are missing the point of Steve Bannon's flood the zone tactic. The point is to overwhelm you with too much shit at the same time, regardless of what they get away with it's something that they want. It's not causing chaos to hide a nefarious plan, the chaos is the plan.
then because of the mods who moved from Reddit to here. They hated that their power was taken away on Reddit so they jumped ship and now get to make their own rules without having to answer to Reddit admins
Combined with your earlier comments, this seems like saying that moderators only moved to Lemmy because they wanted more power which seems almost revisionist. Moderating is a shitty job, a lot of people do it just because they care about their online communities, and many moderators moved from Reddit to Lemmy specifically because they cared about their communities and how what Reddit was doing was ruining them.
Most of them just defederate from any instance that doesn’t highly censor views they don’t like
So, what is your alternative? We should force people to be on platforms that they don't want and have to spend all day blocking people who thrives on antagonizing them? You can just go on those other instances, you don't have to interact with the ones that are, in your words, so authoritarian.
If you don’t ban people they don’t need to create multiple accounts. You just block and move on and they’ll continue doing their thing while you don’t see it. Win-win.
Why wouldn't they create more accounts to get around the blocks? Not to mention other reasons for making more accounts, for example making it seem like your opinion has more widespread support than it actually does.
You’re a typical “everyone I disagree with is a Nazi bigot” who craves censorship and authoritarian leadership because you can’t handle people having differing opinions by the looks of it
And now it sounds like you ran out of things to say, so the only thing left is to try and discredit my character. I am fine with people having different opinions than I do, that's how the world works, but it sounds to me like you're suggesting that discussing income tax rates is the same as disagreeing with someone about whether genocide is acceptable or not. They're not the same thing. Having good-faith discourse and pushing disinformation are not the same thing.
It should be on the onus of the person being a dick to stop being a dick to get to interact with others in their communities, not for the people who aren't being dicks to spend a bunch of their time and energy having to filter out all the dicks. If you disagree with that, you can whenever you want, go to a different community where people have the same opinion as you, but saying that people only want moderation because they can't handle someone else's opinion without "losing their minds" sounds disingenuous at best.
Where did you address them? You just claim that
almost every Lemmy instance is the same, many significantly worse in terms of how authoritarian they are
Without any explanation for why that would be the case whereas I have not have at all had the same experience. Therefore, I don't see how it relates to federated social media at all.
Furthermore, you just state that
some of us just want a place with zero bans and which unless you break the law with your speech, zero bans and moderation
And to just "block them and move on". Honestly, I don't want my time using social media to be spent having to personally block multiple accounts (by people who will probably make more accounts) because they're racists, misogynists, foreign bot farms, etc. Furthermore, I don't want my content and my comments to be used, knowingly or otherwise, to prop up comment sections and threads that are spreading disinformation and bigotry.
If you want that, that's fine. Go to one of those places. But from what I've seen, they are usually where nazis end up congregating, which is one reason why I (and at least some other people) prefer to avoid them.
Found my partner on Hinge as well, so it kind of per definition isn't useless. That being said, I don't think one should invest too much time and energy into it since online dating can be incredibly emotionally and mentally draining.