PhilipTheBucket

joined 2 weeks ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 3 points 2 hours ago

It's one of the places where her and Bernie Sanders seem to be weak.

My guy lol

Okay, sure. Read up. Find the votes and their statements on the floor, I actually think you'll find it pretty interesting.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 1 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

I do not care that AOC has also voted down other Israel funding bills when she has been consistent on funding the Iron Dome.

I feel like you've been infected at this point, and can't really grasp what I'm trying to explain here.

She has not been consistent on funding the Iron Dome. She has been consistent, as far as I know, about trying to defund US aid for Israel in any way she can. This whole thing is a weird and stupid blowing-up of one isolated vote of a stupid amendment proposed by the worst person in congress that was never going to pass, and then a pretty dumb way she chose to explain it.

When has she ever voted, previous to this, to give funding for the Iron Dome? Or did you just make up this "consistency" randomly on the spot because it fit in with the ginned-up stuff you'd already seen about this one particular weird blown-up situation?

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (4 children)

I'll just copy and paste.


For the uninitiated: MTG's amendment left intact the funding for offensive weapons, but cut the funding for defensive weapons for Israel. So there is literally no way AOC could win. Leaving aside the fact that it was a kooky MTG amendment that was never going to pass in the first place... If she voted for the amendment, then everyone who is currently screaming that she's a fake leftist who supports genocide could say "See? SHE VOTED FOR KEEPING ISRAEL'S FUNDING INTACT, SHE SUPPORTS GENOCIDE!" Since she voted against it, they are currently screaming "See? SHE VOTED AGAINST DEFUNDING ISRAEL, SHE SUPPORTS GENOCIDE!"

It's just more can't-win, let's-eat-the-leftest-person-because-we're-super-leftist-I-promise horseshit.

Edit: Here's AOC voting against funding for Israel, in bills that were actually non-Hobson's-choice opportunities to vote against aid for Israel:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/biden-meets-with-aoc-in-wake-of-her-vote-against-military-aid-for-israel/

And her voting against the actual funding bill providing aid to Israel (both offensive and defensive): https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2025212


I was going to link to those from my comment above, but I guess my brain malfunctioned before I got to it. I've said the exact same thing on this topic a sufficient number of times that it's like I'm getting that World War 1 disorder where you can't pull a trigger anymore because the weight of doing it over and over is insupportible.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Didn't mean to tar your hero or anything.

Wait until I find out he cheated on his wife. My fucking head will probably explode. Don't tell me, though, I'm super simple minded when I look at figures I admire in history.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 5 points 3 hours ago (6 children)

See, that's how the propaganda works. She voted against the MTG amendment that stripped a tiny tiny fraction of the funding from Israel. Which was always going to fail, pretty much unanimously, because MTG. And then, when the whole bill (with whole funding for Israel) came to the floor, she voted against it. And also, separate bills which are just for funding Israel in the past

But it's been consistently presented to you with wording that makes it sound like she had a chance to strip all funding from Israel, and she decided not to. Search "horseshit" in this comments section, it's a little complicated, but basically, no she literally didn't vote against what you described.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 4 points 3 hours ago

I mean they could have had it analyzed, probably found out some pretty fascinating things about Roman wine, and then if they wanted to drink it after before it went bad, maybe they could just save some out when they were delivering it for study. Or they could have sold the thing to finance a whole other expedition probably.

I get it. You can't live your life just saving it all in the right file folders. At the same time...

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 3 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (3 children)

critiques of ... DNC from the far left too.

Theeeeere it is lmao. Starting from MLK was a creative and interesting choice, sort of a new spin on "this leftist person you like is actually BAD because he's WORKING FOR THE MAN and as a good leftist I don't think we should support him." I certainly have seen that one, but not about a political figure that's been dead for over 60 years.

In any case I think we're done here. At least it explains why you follow closely with the pattern of:

  1. Saying one thing and kind of sticking with it, not really varying or responding no matter what anyone says, just repetitiously talking about your thing
  2. Explaining what a lot of people who disagree with you believe ("all black people are the same or at least have the same opinions") by way of (a) making them sound stupid by putting stupid views in their mouths (b) redirecting away from what they're actually saying to you about what they believe / why they might disagree with you about your wild one thing that you're saying
  3. Tying it back to the Democrats, and specifically why "a lot of people" have these important critiques of them

Like I say... we're done here. Have fun with your engagement on Lemmy. I hope you find some people who really take you super super seriously and listen closely to what you are sharing with them, to help inform them fully about this urgent point of view they need to understand.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 4 points 4 hours ago (5 children)

I did find it fascinating that contemporaries of MLK has such disparaging views of him.

It wasn't "his contemporaries." It was Malcolm X, apparently.

His liberal contemporaries, sure, they were constantly telling him to tone it down or that it wasn't the time, or that he was making it difficult for them to make "progress." His civil rights contemporaries, by and large, were pretty in favor of what he was doing. Sometimes they even showed up and walked around with him in some little groupings, in public, just to subtly send a message that they might have been in favor of what he was doing.

I have no idea why you are going out of your way to shit on MLK in this particular way. It has been an interesting little window in the workings of some people on Lemmy. I think, honestly, that some of it comes from feeling comfortable expressing opinions and assertions about things where you honestly don't know even a vague approximation of what the fuck you're talking about.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 13 points 4 hours ago

This was clearly where it's going. I guess, if it's on, it's on. Probably better if it happens sooner before ICE staffs up, figures out what the fuck it's doing when they're snatching people other than asthmatic students, and starts getting accustomed to real resistance.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 5 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (7 children)

Okay. Here's the whole non-excerpted speech BTW:

https://www.themelaninproject.org/tmpblog/2021/7/12/message-to-the-grassroots-by-malcom-x-full-transcript

Sounds like a fine critique. I don't really agree with it, but sure, they were both working for racial justice.

Personally I think there was a reason why MLK was killed probably by the government, and Malcolm X wasn't. Sure, maybe if X had lived, they would have shot him too, I don't know. And they probably knew it was coming and didn't try to stop it. But they definitely thought MLK was dangerous enough to kill. Whatever Malcolm X thought about it and had to say, the government themselves definitely weren't happy like "oh we gotta keep this guy around so he can keep everyone on the plantation for us."

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 14 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (9 children)

You realize that MLK was literally speaking up against racism, the Vietnam War, economic justice, to the point that they shot him, right?

They only have a little handful of in-broad-daylight public figure bullets they can use every decade without people starting to get all up in arms about it, and out of all the people in the US, they spent one on him. He was saying that the whole of race relations was a sideshow for the deeply rooted economic injustice that every working man was facing, we need to stop the wars, stop the exploitation of everyone black and white... do you think they shot him because he was doing too good a job of sidelining everyone's righteous anger with these horizon-spanning marches, and they wanted more of a challenge with him out of the picture and the blacks better able to organize once he was gone?

What the fuck are you talking about?

The whole US media was saying he was a communist, a rioter, he was going to burn down the cities and ruin everything...

Why the fuck would I hate Malcolm X if I like MLK Jr? What the fuck are you even talking about? We need Matt Taibbi in here to come up with new metaphors for how little sense this all makes.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Cuz I’m still not sure what the original accusation was supposed to be.

Got it. Okay, I tried.

 

Hey, there are some communities on sh.itjust.works that are supposed to be fed from RSS feeds:

Is it possible to get someone to un-restrict those and then make the !rss@ibbit.at bot a mod? Or else just delete them since they're not getting updated? I reached out to the human mod but I didn't hear anything back.

Also, this I think should be deleted, since it's moved to ibbit.at now:

 

Lead Belly, Wikipedia.

It was a warning — a spoken-word portent of the dangers lurking in plain sight. A call to vigilance. A whispered watchword passed between those who knew the system was not built for them. From churches to courtrooms, ballrooms to drinking fountains, every institution was wired against them.

“Liberty and justice for all” was a hollow mantra, a borrowed line from movie scripts, not a manifest reality. A promise that never crossed the color barrier. A refrain as empty as the bridge of a vapid pop song, sung past the millions it excluded. The very same who weren’t included in the declaration that claimed that all men were created equal and who were barred from the promised unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

“So I advise everybody, be a little careful when they go along through there [Alabama]—best stay woke, keep their eyes open.”

The word is short. It bursts from puckered lips and explodes in a dead-end consonant. It’s a four-letter epithet, one that its user might not even fully comprehend. Its deliberate morphosyntactic rebellion only adds to its iconoclastic aura. It refused to follow the rules and didn’t care whether it was misunderstood and today it challenges those that use it to grapple with its depth and true meaning.

It was in 1938, during the segregated black-and-white days of the American South, that this zeitgeist word was first recorded. Linguistic history was made by a man who carried a thousand songs in his memory from across generations and was himself a product of the nineteenth century. Huddie Ledbetter, better known as Lead Belly, the self-described “musicianer” (to avoid pigeonholing tags like bluesman or folk singer) was first recorded using the word in this context, warning his listeners to be vigilant against a system raised against them. He finishes his song with a warning, a stark reminder to northern blacks that the freedom they believed they possessed was fragile; in the segregationist South, those rights could vanish in an instant. He intones that they best stay ‘woke’.

The song preceding the warning is deceptively cheerful, the kind of tune that might get your foot tapping while your civil rights disappear. It jumps, it swings, it practically begs for a dance floor. You can picture Lead Belly smiling as he plays it, which only adds to its cunning. The genius lies in the bait: rhythm first, truth second. The listener is already halfway to the chorus before the full weight of the message sets in, this charming little ditty is a canary in the coal mine.

“Be careful. Stay woke. Keep your eyes open.” He wasn’t offering travel advice. He was sounding the alarm. The subject of the song? The Scottsboro Boys: nine Black teenagers accused of raping two white women in what was, at the time, not so much a miscarriage of justice as it was standard operating procedure. The evidence was flimsy, the trials a farce, and the outrage, when it came at all, was years too late. But such was the legal pageantry of the Jim Crow South, robes, gavels, and a healthy disdain for anything resembling due process. The case would go on to help ignite the civil rights movement and loosely inspire To Kill A Mockingbird, a work of fiction that, ironically, became more widely taught in American schools than the real event ever was. Until, of course, it too was deemed dangerous and became one of the most banned books in America.

Lead Belly, born around 1888, a mere 23 years after slavery was technically abolished, though its spirit hung around like a houseguest who wouldn’t take the hint, became a voice for the voiceless. His music carried the bruises of a people told they were free while being worked, watched, and whipped by other means. He lived a wandering life, not out of whimsy, but because opportunity had a habit of walking right past Black men with guitars. He learned songs the old way, by ear, by heart, by necessity, preserving the history of a people the country had tried very hard to keep illiterate, and thus, conveniently forgettable, without history.

His oeuvre is a pillar of that noble cry from the depths of the Black experience, of knowing that you have to be conscious of the politics of race, class, systemic racism, and the ways that society is stratified and not equal. It was carved from the lived experience of being on the wrong side of every American promise. It was a clarion call for awareness of the steaming pile of racial injustice that the West has been drowning in since the first slave ship hit their shores.

“Woke” was never meant to be a fashion statement, nor a punchline for late-night pundits. It was forged in fire — a warning against complacency, a code of survival in a hostile world, a whispered truth passed hand to hand in places where speaking too loudly could cost you your job, your freedom, your life. And now? It’s been defanged, ridiculed, and repurposed as a laughable tool for the establishment to twist and use as a weapon against the very people who coined it. A tool turned trap.

But here we are.

That once-powerful symbol of resistance has been seized by the very institutions that have spent centuries systematically grinding Black lives into the dirt. The term’s true meaning – an enlightened awareness of the raw, open wound that is America’s racial nightmare – has been hijacked, rebranded, and bastardized by the media, politicians, and every smarmy corporate entity looking to peddle their brand of faux-progressive vacuousness.

White power structures, always ready to neutralize any threat to their dominion, have managed to take “woke” and turn it into a bad word. What was once a rallying cry for justice has been twisted into a political cudgel used to mock and discredit any real attempt to rip the veil off the charade of equality. It’s not just a matter of words, it’s an all out war on language itself. These are the same tricks they’ve been pulling for centuries, using distorted definitions and reworked narratives to keep the oppressed on the back foot.

The message is clear: If you’re Black and you’ve got the audacity to say, “Enough is enough,” you better brace yourself for a full-throttle media blitz designed to slap you back into line. “Woke” isn’t just a word anymore; it’s a weapon in the arsenal of those who would rather keep things as they are. Keep the system in place. Maintain the lie.

The war on the word is real. One must admire Governor Ron DeSantis, a man of such moral fortitude and delicate constitution that he has taken it upon himself to wage battle not against poverty, corruption, or corporate greed, but against a single four-letter word. With all the thunderous pomp of a preacher chasing demons out of a tent revival, he stood tall, or as tall as his platform shoes would allow, and declared with Churchillian solemnity: “We will fight the woke in the legislature. We will fight the woke in education. We will fight the woke in the businesses. We will never, ever surrender to the woke mob.”

One would think he was rallying troops at the Somme, not banning Dr. Seuss in suburban Florida. And then, with the air of a man who had just won a duel at dawn, he announced, “Our state is where woke goes to die.” Which is to say, Florida has bravely volunteered to become the final resting place of empathy, historical accuracy, and critical thought, a noble sacrifice indeed. If only all public servants had such vision, such valor, such tireless commitment to the extermination of adjectives. The republic would be saved in no time.

But perhaps the word isn’t dead. Perhaps it’s only been buried alive, waiting to be reclaimed. Not diluted. Not defanged. Reclaimed.

Woke should still mean what it always did — a refusal to sleep through injustice, a refusal to walk blind through a rigged world. But now, we must open our eyes even wider. Because the danger has spread. The systems of domination are no longer content to whisper their intentions, they’re marching proudly through parliaments and prime-time, saluting strongmen and silencing dissent. Expansion of its meaning doesn’t mean dilution. It means depth. Woke must grow to meet the scale of the threat, but never lose sight of its roots.

The cruelty has gone global. In Hungary, in India, in Israel, in Italy, in Turkey, in Russia, in El Salvador, in Argentina and in the United States authoritarians are in power, while in consolidated democracies like France, Germany and Spain they are waiting in the wings for their chance to dismantle decades of hard-fought freedoms. From refugee camps to pride bans, from book bans and even book burnings to surveillance states, the machinery of control is humming louder than ever. Fascism might be wearing a friendlier face, corporate-backed and algorithm-approved, but its boots are just as heavy. And they still land first on the necks of the most vulnerable who then get sent to concentration camps with merch-friendly, tourist-board names like Alligator Alcatraz, where malice is privatized, sanitized, and sold with a Cruella smile.

To be woke today is not to simply repost a tweet or correct someone’s pronouns at brunch. It is to see — really see — the gears turning beneath the spectacle. To understand how the attacks on feminism are connected to the attacks on teachers. How banning history books is connected to banning abortions. How denying Palestinians their humanity is connected to deporting migrants at sea. How billionaires cosplaying as victims is just a distraction from the suffering they bankroll.

Woke is vigilance. Woke is resistance. Woke is knowing the storm is already here and choosing to stand against it, not just for yourself, but for everyone in its path. Being woke isn’t about performative outrage or headline-chasing culture wars. It’s not about manufactured grievances or moral panic over pronouns, casting choices or Happy Holidays. These distractions are meant to trivialize the real fight: your right to vote, your right to exist in freedom, the survival of the planet itself.

While the right derides “wokeness” as someone putting oat milk in their coffee or casting a Black mermaid, real wokeness is about sounding the alarm when protestors are jailed, dissidents are disappeared, elections are rigged, or laws are passed to ban books and criminalize care.

It’s time to pull “woke” out of the mud it’s been dragged through. To scrub off the satire and the sneers and remind people that it was never a joke. It was a lifeline. A warning label. A survival guide written in code. At its core, staying woke means staying alert to the theft of your rights — the right to protest, to learn your history, to love who you love, to exist without fear.

So let the word expand.
Let it rise.
Let it mean Black. Brown. Queer. Poor. Disabled. Undocumented. Defiant.
Let it mean being vigilant against every form of violence that power cloaks in flags, logos, and prayers.
Let it mean choosing the side of the oppressed, even if you’re not one of them, because freedom is a chain that breaks at its weakest link.

Woke was never supposed to be comfortable. It was supposed to keep you up at night.

Lead Belly wasn’t singing about branding or buzzwords. He was warning us. And in this moment, with democracy gasping and the jackboots echoing louder each day, there’s never been a better time to hear his voice. His warning hasn’t changed. The dangers still lurk in plain sight. Best stay woke.

The post The Word That Wouldn’t Die: Awake in the Age of Forgetting appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

 

Fark's title was "Women are smarter than men, and it's hurting their employment prospects"

 

Okay so here's what happened.

There is a mod of some AI-generated image forums who has been slinging out bans for "anti-AI trolling" to people who have never participated in their community, apparently more or less at random. Full disclosure, I am one of those people, and I'm confident I have never done any anti-AI trolling.

Apparently the justification for this is that other people are being aggressively hateful to this mod, coming in and being incredibly abusive, transphobic, insulting her for alleged alcoholism and making fake pictures of her and generally just being horrible. Conveniently, one of these people showed up in the thread where we were talking about it, on cue, and started slinging around horribleness which provided a convenient cover for people to say "And THAT's why we have to be really strict with the bans!" type of things. We never really got to the bottom of what the connection was between that and the random bans to other people who were longstanding accounts that didn't seem to be doing any of those things.

Anyway, now another abusive alt of the (now obviously bannned) abusive alt that originally stirred up trouble has made a pitch-perfect effort to inflame divisions and create a balkanization between the "pro AI" people, centered around dbzer0 (edit: ~~and blahaj~~), and "anti AI" people, centered around everywhere else.

This is two identical posts, made to two separate communities which are guaranteed to have totally opposite takes on it based on their different levels of information about the issue, which will then lead everyone to assume that the other community is just being horrible about it on purpose when they draw different conclusions:

(Edit: The troll has now been banned, so I can't link to their posts anymore. Just imagine this post, except made by one of the trolls who are featured in the comments of that post, you can dig in the modlog or in spoiler text of some other comments to see some of what they were saying. Anyway, the troll posted the exact same complaint about being "unfairly" banned both to lemmy.world, where they got tons of sympathy and upvotes, and to dbzer0, where people who were aware of what they were up to gave them derision and downvotes.)

Like I said, if the goal is to create division and heated argument between two opposing "camps," this is pretty much as perfect as you can get it. I expect it to work, at least to a certain amount, to get people embittered towards one another and arguing about the issue impassioned that the other side is wrong and stupid.

I can't find the link right now, but there was someone on reddit who claimed that they used to do this professionally (trying to disrupt online communities so that organized shilling could succeed better there, because the previous coherence that they had had had been replaced by confusion and bickering, and then they could insert bullshit without it being pushed back on as strongly.) It's fascinating. What they described isn't exactly like this, but it definitely sort of rings similar to me. Just to throw that out there.

Also, UniversalMonk is involved, because of course he is.

Edit: Fun with grammar

 

A Polish programmer running on fumes recently accomplished what may soon become impossible: beating an advanced AI model from OpenAI in a head-to-head coding competition. The 10-hour marathon left him "completely exhausted."

On Wednesday, programmer Przemysław Dębiak (known as "Psyho"), a former OpenAI employee, narrowly defeated the custom AI model in the AtCoder World Tour Finals 2025 Heuristic contest in Tokyo. AtCoder, a Japanese platform that hosts competitive programming contests and maintains global rankings, held what may be the first contest where an AI model competed directly against top human programmers in a major onsite world championship. During the event, the maker of ChatGPT participated as a sponsor and entered an AI model in a special exhibition match titled "Humans vs AI." Despite the tireless nature of silicon, the company walked away with second place.

"Humanity has prevailed (for now!)," wrote Dębiak on X, noting he had little sleep while competing in several competitions across three days. "I'm completely exhausted. ... I'm barely alive."

Read full article

Comments

view more: next ›