Admiral Patrick[Lemmy] The response on Lemmy to the shooting yesterday has been a real test of character, and so many of y'all have failed
best_username_everThe sheer number of people here praising the shooter
Post links because I haven’t seen one yet.
Go take a look at lemmy.world modlog. Most of those messages have been rightfully removed.
I agree with you, however denouncing political violence doesn’t need to extend to fawning.
This is my favorite proposed response I’ve seen:
If I was a Dem asked what I think this would be my short statement:
History has shown us that political violence like this is a hallmark of authoritarian states.
That it turned against the man inciting it shows how slippery and dangerous our current moment is.
Come November we have a choice – an America where a man like Trump, who believes lynching his political enemies is fine, sits in the white house while fires of political retribution burn across the nation; or an America where our fragile democracy rests in less unhinged hands, safe for the moment.
Delia Christina (@[email protected])
If I was a Dem asked what I think this would be my short statement: History has shown us that political violence like this is a hallmark of authoritarian states. That it turned against the man inciting it shows how slippery and dangerous our current moment is. Come November we have a choice -- an America where a man like Trump, who believes lynching his political enemies is fine, sits in the white house while fires of political retribution burn across the nation; or an America where our fragile democracy rests in less unhinged hands, safe for the moment. ##
doesn’t need to extend to fawning.
Fawning?
Not saying it’s what you’re doing.
Really just trying to say some folks are being more gentle than they should and over correcting.
As usual, the best way is a middle ground but the internet rewards extreme positions.
Gotcha. Was scratching my head as to what could be seen as fawning in my rebuke of this kind of behavior. lol
I haven’t seen anybody praising the shooter. I have seen about bunch of gallows humor. Is that what you’re talking about?
No, gallows humor is one thing when it’s not a thinly-veiled praise (which much of it is).
The mods have been working overtime, so that could be why?
Then you should be able to link to the mod log of the removed stuff
lemmy.blahaj.zone/modlog?page=1&actionType=ModRem…
Varies by instance’s point of view, naturally, and Lemmy UI doesn’t allow filtering by community or searching by “reason” (even though the API supports the former), but there’s your home instance’s.
There are a few there, but nothing to support your initial claim of it being rampant
No disagreement here, especially since you quoted me at least two and a half times.
The people celebrating this and wishing the shooter had succeeded don’t seem to put much thought into the kind of world they’re advocating for. Don’t forget that you also have to live in that world, and it’s extremely naive to think it won’t eventually turn against you. If you think things are bad in the US, take a look at how it’s going in countries where this is the standard operating procedure.
Lol, I did. I tried to reply to ask if you minded me quoting you, but the post where that convo happened was removed and I couldn’t (also figured a DM might be creepy lol)
Do you want attribution?
Do you want attribution?
Only if this lands you a book deal or a sponsorship
Boo hoo. The guy who made our lives measurably worse almost got what was coming to him.
I choose to read the post in Patrick Stewart’s voice.
I love that. lol. Gonna try that myself (except for the y’all. my brain cannot produce that in Patrick Stewart’s voice)
Well said.
This is how we genuinely defend liberty and equality, the values so many brave soldiers died on battlefields all over the world to protect. Far more effectively than wishing for yet another blood drenched battlefield, liable to get the same results as all those in centuries past.
Did the US Civil War end racism? Did WW2 end fascism? Did the assassinations of MLK Jr or Abraham Lincoln end the fight for civil rights? No. Because ideas cannot be destroyed, they can only be effectively fought with other, better ideas. Not blood and steel.
Defense with violence from other, already-engaged violence is one thing. Accelerating towards new violence is another, and is not going to truly fix a problem.
👏
I said something similar last week, but less concisely. Was downvoted to hell for it because it went against the lynch mob mentality.
Some of the responses to this post are truly encouraging in a “faith in humanity restored” kind of way. So thank you for being one of those.
Abdicating the lawful, peaceful transfer of power would be insanity.
ScubusYes… it would… cough January 6
I’m certainly not upset that someone tried to take out the guy that literally said he wanted to become a dictator if elected. I don’t think that political assassination is the right move in most situations, this included. On the contrary, I think someone should put a bullet in Putin’s head. So I ask where do we draw the line? Currently the system is corrupt and is shielding Trump from consequences. That leaves the people with few options. What is 2A for if not to defend the country from a tyranical dictator? To me, this is a “leopards ate your face” situation. Trump has been fucking around, and the people are bypassing the broken legal system so he can find out. I’m sad he lived.
Defense with violence from other, already-engaged violence is one thing. Accelerating towards new violence is another, and is not going to truly fix a problem.
–Comment from [email protected] above
If Trump were in the morgue right this minute, it would truly solve many problems. I don’t want someone to kill him to get there, rather an embolism, heart attack, or rabies would be ideal. If some unhinged individual pulls a trigger, I’m not condoning it, but I’m also not going to look a gift horse in the mouth.
not going to look a gift horse in the mouth.
Not looking a gift horse in the mouth is one thing. Praising the mysterious benefactor who dropped it off or asking for more gift horses or a better gift horse next time is crossing a line.
I’m not doing any of those things. I’m not asking for more violence or even condoning this last bout. I do think the world would have benefited from Trump’s death, but I would prefer in not come from the hand of a USA citizen. If his death comes from a politically motivated shooting, I’m not going to be upset, but I won’t go glorifying the shooter.
The post isn’t directed at any one person, and if you feel called out, that’s between you and your conscience alone. The post is directed at the general, lynch-mob mentality that’s running rampant.
“A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.”
–Agent K, Men in Black
That’s fair, but I don’t know that the mob mentality out there is as pro political assassination as you are letting on. I’d imagine the majority of people that are upset that the shooter missed have a similar outlook to me. For a moment, millions of people saw that headline and thought their prayers were answered, most just won’t say it out loud.
The potential disaster if Trump is elected could negatively affect not only millions in the US, but potentially countries all over the world. It’s cliche, but this could be a go back in time and kill Hitler situation. I’m not saying it is, but there is the potential. The legal systems, Congress, POTUS, et all have been failing citizens for years to hold corruption accountable. People are getting pissed off, and some are being pushed to the edge. It’s less about being politically motivated, more about future preservation to many of these people.
I’d say this is like the trolly problem, but this is easier. If rapist, felon, traitor Trump is laying on a set of tracks, and 1 million people on the other set. Now, the trolly might split the tracks and “only” take out some migrants build a new section, but the person behind the lever could make a decision that affects the outcome.
Regardless of the reasoning, justified feelings or not, the extreme rhetoric is just adding fuel to an already raging fire. I stand firm on that opinion.
I didn’t think that saying, “I (or anyone) am upset that Trump is still alive” is extreme rhetoric. I think saying, “someone should kill Trump” is. I haven’t been much of the latter. I also don’t believe that gallows humor about the former is extreme rhetoric either. I think that given the nature of the event, it just hits harder.
Nikki Haley or someone like that wouldn’t be the next nominee. Ron DeSantis would, in the current gop climate. Not really much of an improvement from the policy perspective, same authoritarian crap in a slightly more sophisticated package.
I don’t think Desantis has the support to pull it off. He had such a bad showing, that I don’t think there’s enough time to repair the image enough to those that matter before November. Regardless of who the candidate would be, I don’t think any of them have that thing that makes MAGAts love Trump so much, and none of them have the same ties that Trump made during his Presidency that I think are most dangerous to our future.
Outside of that, there are still plenty of other benefits and solved problems outside of just the election that would be solved.
yahoo.com/…/2024-poll-desantis-slides-as-trump-su…
I don’t think all those MAGA supporters would support a non-MAGA. They refer to them as rhinos.
Agree. Someone would obviously take the nomination, but I don’t think any of them have the support to win an election regardless. I personally just don’t think Ronald would get the nom.
Trump is a symptom, not a cause. Hes a grifter, a con-man, not a political strategist. He’s capitalizing on an environment that gives him power, and others are capitalizing on his distraction.
And him lying dead in a morgue doesn’t stop it, if anything it would galvanize his base to prove that everything he (and the people using him as a lightning rod) are saying.
It wouldn’t be the end of something horrible, it’d be the start of a whole new horror show.
... praising the shooter, advocating for, glorifying, or just flat out calling for violence ...
There's a big difference between the above, and recognizing that the world would be a better place without Donald Trump in it.
The latter is not what I’m describing, though. That can also be clearly stated without venturing into the former.
Still worth making a note of.
It’s not all of Lemmy though - on Feddit.uk, nobody’s even mentioned it. The Britons are just discussing the wide variety of meals you can make by combining chips, cheese, beans, gravy and curry sauce in different arrangements.
Fair enough.
The Britons are just discussing the wide variety of meals you can make by combining chips, cheese, beans, gravy and curry sauce in different arrangements
Got a link? lol. That sounds right up my alley.
“Character” is just as much a social construct as gender is. What you call a “test of character” I call a “natural human reaction.”
When you learned about all the evil Hitler did, did you scold the people who celebrated his death? What about Stalin? Pol Pot? Mao? The US government assassinated Bin Laden and the Iraqi people hanged Hussein- did you decry them not being tried for their crimes? Should people not be happy that Lee Harvey Oswald got what he gave out?
Plenty of historians have drawn parallels between what’s happening in the US today and where Weimar Germany was in the 1920’s. Obviously I’m not saying that Trump is on the same level as the other people I mentioned, but if a person truly sees the historical connections, do you blame them for trying to avert what comes next using more extreme methods?
The fact is, political violence has been ingrained into American myth since its inception. Every year of public school we’re taught that the people who overthrew the government with violence were right to do so because they succeeded, while the people who tried to secede with violence were wrong to do so because they failed. Why would you expect any American to not think otherwise? People like Washington and John Brown are hailed as great American heroes for using violence.
On top of that, Donald Trump is a man that the legal system is bending over backwards to prevent him from facing any consequences whatsoever from crimes he’s committed. The “process” isn’t working- is it a shock that when the system is failing the people, the people will take matters into their hands? The voice of the people is systematically being silenced; people will therefore resort to whatever means they have to make themselves heard. This is a constant throughout all of human history.
And not just that, but Donald Trump is the head of a political party that shrugs its shoulders when hundreds of children are murdered in schools or churches or malls annually. Every time a school shooting happens, Republicans rush to decry Democrats for “politicizing” a tragedy to avoid any sort of gun control legislation from even being discussed. Should people not feel some sort of vindication at seeing the party that refuses to address gun violence in the US suffering from that refusal?
So, yeah. I think that someone being upset that a person tried to assassinate a political candidate is a rational response. But I also think it’s not unreasonable to have other feelings about it too.
The founding fathers did not attack the British. They declared their independence, and then were invaded. Defense and attack are different things.
It’s true that the Confederacy was itself invaded after declaring its own independence, no question. But then what values were being defended? The right to own other humans as chattel? Not quite the same.
The Americans did shoot first. Militiamen marched on powder and arms warehouses in Lexington and Concord and after being ordered to disperse by a British colonial, shot at the regulars assembled there.
Yes, and the Confederates shot first in the US Civil War. However, who fired the first bullet has nothing to do with who is invading who, or who is starting a war. These are all three different things. That would be like saying the first shot of WW1 was the one that killed the Archduke, and not the actual countries that declared war on each other and marshalled their armies.
There are many ways to respond to a single atrocity or even battle. The British could have, if they wished, withdrawn. Similarly, Fort Sumpter could have, if they wished, surrendered.
I don’t think there’s necessarily anything inherently wrong with believing that his death would solve whatever issue people hope it would. It’s not obvious to me that this would be the guaranteed outcome, but I guess I can’t blame anyone for thinking that.
What I do take issue with is endorsing this kind of behavior. I don’t want to live in a world where we solve political debates by assassinating the opposition. That’s not how civilized people behave. Do I mourn the death of Hitler or shun the people celebrating his death? Of course not. Would I have preferred for him to be caught alive, tried, and sentenced to prison for the rest of his life? Yes.
If Putin accidentally wandered into Finland tomorrow while picking blueberries in the forest and gets arrested, does he deserve to be hanged in the marketplace and made an example of? Yes. Is that what we should do? No. That’s what they would do. That is exactly the moment we’re supposed to take the moral high ground and show people on the other side that we have principles and we’re better than that. This is the test so many people failed today. They’re NOT better than the people they oppose.
verity_kindleWell said, OP.
It’s not.
Treating a fascist in good faith is exactly how they get into power. The whole post is conveniently ignoring Trump already started this mess trying to get Congress and his own VP killed to maintain power.
This isn’t about Trump. It’s about condemning the shooter.
Context matters
That’s exactly how extremists justify political violence
Let me know when people try to kill a House rep simply because they disagree with policy proposals.
Ah, so if they do it first it must be okay, then.
You don’t stop fascism by inviting it over for a chat.
Trump and the MAGA movement are not acting in good faith. If they were I would fully agree. But context is really important.
Louder for the people in the back, please
jeffwYou think the content you see is bad? Check the modlogs. People really went over the top in some cases
Oh, I’m sure. Appreciate the work you all are putting in :)
I’m an admin. I see it all, even stuff that’s been removed and the lurkers silently cheering that shit on (which is what utterly broke me and inspired this post).
This reads like the opinion of someone unharmed by the fascism coming.
What I will focus on though is Trump is a cult leader. Not an ordinary political figure. Your sentiment should extend to people working in our political processes in good faith. When they aren’t, and they’ve already demonstrated willingness to harm others, they’ve broken the social contract and should no longer assume such benefits. Killing them is an extreme solution. But it’s the solution tyrants tend to finally be taken down with.
Trump himself tried to get a mob to execute Congress and his own VP. In a just society he’d have already been hung for treason and sedition. Trump tore up the social contract on his own and should reap what he’s sown.
Our forefathers went to war to free themselves from tyranny. This country was born through bloodshed. Time is a river, and we have been through these rapids time and time again; deference to authoritarian figures will result in authoritarianism.
Wake up. Stop capitulating. We only have a republic if we can keep it.
ScrubblesDon’t worry man, I’ve noticed an uptick in crap, but for the most part I’ve just seen a large uptick in trolls. They’re coming out of the woodwork right now, they latch onto stuff like this to stir the pot.
You and I don’t agree on everything, but we definitely agree on this. Just don’t feed the trolls