I still think the ultimate outcome wouldn’t have changed but yeah, rewatching it he does seem a bit more provocative than in the rest of the interview. Maybe it did tick him off a bit too much and he decided to go for it in the heat of the moment.
I think it’s because he hoped there were actual guarantees, considering Trump is definitely interested in Ukraine’s mineral industry. But as the meeting went on it became increasingly clear that keeping Putin his BFF was even more important and he just wanted to have his cake and eat it too.
You’re still supporting genocide by proxy by living in the US and paying taxes, contributing to the GDP and whatnot, though. You should move and contribute to a different country if you really can’t stand to support genocide in any form.
I mean, he was asking a question that had to be asked at one point or another. If Vance had an answer to that, he wouldn’t have lost face. If he didn’t, that means any kind of deal they could’ve made would’ve been useless (if not harmful) to Ukraine.
What would’ve he gained by not making that question? The chance to make a deal with no warranties? I feel like he’s a very good strategic thinker, and that wasn’t a choice dictated by pride or by the heat of the moment. There was nothing significant to gain by not asking that question, they would’ve just discussed the deal behind closed doors and he’d still have to refuse because Trump’s only warranty would still be “well so far he hasn’t broken promises with me, though”.
It can be saved, through voting in primaries, grassroot movements, and trying to pressure whoever is in power to do the right thing.
But all of this is only possible if you keep voting for the lesser evil. By electing people like Trump, the US population is sending the message that they like those positions, and therefore the other party will keep shifting more and more to the right to try and capture those voters. And the only way a nation can be saved under those conditions is violent revolution. Are you ready for violent revolution? Because if you’re not I’d suggest you either start a plan to migrate to a better country, or get accustomed to voting “against” people, instead of “for” people.
Too bad that in the US there’s three sides, two that support genocide and a third one which supports whoever gets the most votes out of the other two.
You literally can’t avoid “supporting genocide” in a FPTP system, refusing to choose just means letting others choose for you. And you can’t tell me in good faith that both outcomes were the same.
So what should’ve been the answer to Vance’s proposal of “diplomacy”, in your opinion? Do you think he shouldn’t have questioned the validity of it, in spite of the precedents? Wouldn’t that just mean accepting the deal without any guarantee of protection like it happened before?
We need to get more people in here if we want it to actually be a Reddit competitor. Right now it’s good for some communities, but smaller ones are still extremely underpopulated.
That’s what I’m saying, the snowball effect will definitely be in full effect after the first 10. You do one per day and see how on the 11th day the richest person of the world has exactly 999 million dollars.
As it has been said over and over, those people don’t need all of that money at all. Once they realize them having it is actually detrimental they’ll be quick to dump it on whatever they feel is the best use for it (which could be giving them to someone they trust, sure, but does Musk have 396 people he trusts? Hell I’m not even sure he has one!)
Of course this is just fantasy and requires some god-like figure to act out, but while we’re just talking fantasy I’m convinced if that figure just showed up and said “from next month onwards, whoever owns at least one billion dollars will be killed” this could all be solved without a single person dying (of course excluding people like Musk which would suddenly find himself unable to function with a net worth under 1B and lose it all in one day).
200? I’m betting most charities would be set after the first 10.
They’re not “against reform”, they’re disenfranchised, lazy or just… not the brightest minds.
They made a mistake (a big one at that), but that doesn’t mean that they like what’s happening. The upper class has been doing their best to keep us dumb, busy, tired and uninformed. And it’s clearly working.
First, people supporting Trump are not the majority by any metric. They are 49.8% of the people who voted, which is 31,8% of the eligible voters and 23,3% of the total us population. You could argue that the majority of people “don’t hate” Trump, and while that’s still a scary metric, it’s not the point that I wanted to make.
“They” aren’t Republicans or Trump supporters, they’re wealth-hoarding billionaires that actively make people’s lives worse. As it has already been said, support for Luigi is pretty much bipartisan. Nearly everyone hates those people, and even plenty of people who voted Trump did it because they see him as “one of the people” (for some godforsaken reason). They’re propagandized into voting Republican through all the culture war, misinformation and fear mongering, but when people like Brian Thompson die, no one is actually sad and a lot actually celebrate.
Trump does indeed have a personality cult, but from what I’ve gathered the great majority of people voting him aren’t part of that and they don’t actually like him, it’s just that they hate “the gays”, “the libs”, or “the immigrants” more.
He traded his life for another. He showed the world that it’s possible. And “we” outnumber “them”. Making people realize that is an achievement in itself.
Would you say people like Rosa Parks “didn’t accomplish anything”?
The thread was about Global Switch Day, whose purpose is to leave proprietary social media for ones that won’t sell your data or get enshittified. So Rednote being proprietary already makes it irrelevant to the discussion.
Even if it actually was better than mainstream social media at the moment, it would still be at the same risk of being enshittified due to that. It’s just a bandaid solution, like people leaving Twitter for Bluesky.
And besides that, most sources I found say Rednote does have ads.
Based on what? It’s not like you can immediately notice if your data is being stolen.
“I’m sick of apps owned by American oligarchs who want to steal my data! This app owned by Chinese oligarchs will surely be a better experience”
Whoops, fixed. My keyboard somehow gave the blame to non-eligible voters too.
Elon is supposedly on the spectrum, so he could have done it to show his excitement, without realizing the true meanings and implications.
And considering he’s on social media 24/7, he should’ve realized what people interpreted it as by now and posted an apology repudiating fascism.
But he didn’t, did he?
Reminder that ~270 170 million Americans allowed this to happen.
So in the end that means you can, and already did, cross that line. You just don’t want to do that when it specifically comes to voting.