Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
Fascism needs to antagonize outside groups. It contradicts the narrative that somebody who "has it all" - is white, gunloving and churchgoing - to suddenly take up a gun and shoot somebody who is preaching the fascism.
Meanwhile Wombat has Kirk in top 4 of his celebrated deaths
On September 19 2025 04:43 WombaT wrote: I’d put Charlie Kirk in my top 4 celebrated deaths.
Jankisa also has him somewhere on his list:
On September 19 2025 05:42 Jankisa wrote:
Personally, for me Kirk doesn't really rank that high, I'd definitely have Rush above him.
I dont think they ever even meet the guy.
It doesant even matter if guy was leftist (which I would say is 9 out of 10 chance he was). What matter, is that left endorsed it en masse. It doesnt matter what Democrat leading figures did, what matters is that Democrats are party of those people.
On September 18 2025 02:22 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 17 2025 22:19 KT_Elwood wrote: I find the sentiment "He can't be right wing, if he was in love with a transperson". hilarious.
On September 17 2025 21:50 Magic Powers wrote: .... That means it was an assassination based on Kirk's expression of political views. But as you correctly point out that doesn't imply TR was either left or right. He may've chosen Kirk as his target based on the demographics Kirk expressed hatred for, and not based on the ideology Kirk represented.
....
You got it. Expressing hatred based on Religion/Race/Gender/Sexual orientation is not expressing a political view.
That's just being a threat to other people's existence.
Americans and especially right-wing people in my mind have a rather narrow approach to combat existencial threats. (Hint: It's always involving guns!)
I think this conversation is not handled responsibly when its between left/right wing people disagreeing. We all agree there are times when people should die for their political beliefs. We may not agree a specific person had sufficiently wrong beliefs to be killed, but WW2 was totally about "political beliefs".
On September 18 2025 03:57 Phyanketto wrote:
On September 18 2025 02:22 Mohdoo wrote: I think this conversation is not handled responsibly when its between left/right wing people disagreeing. We all agree there are times when people should die for their political beliefs. We may not agree a specific person had sufficiently wrong beliefs to be killed, but WW2 was totally about "political beliefs".
Agreed, the vitriol has become too much, but one side is broadly armed and in control of government, and openly flaunting the constitution and established legal precedent.
This was released the other day, and while I am loathe to speculate, this would appear to be the exact sort of thing the right is calling for. Attacking someone's beliefs is not the same thing as attacking someone's personhood or safety, which is basically what the more extreme (platformed) arm of the right is doing. The very fact that they can advocate things like that and this should be terrifying to everyone who cares about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I fully realize that those 'rappers' are just individuals, but at the same time, so was Tyler Robinson. The response on the right has not been about individuals, it has been collectivist and identity-based, which is ironically the thing they claim to hate most. They seem to be happy to sacrifice whole groups and their identity as freedom-loving Americans to sate their bloodlust.
Seems like people here have 0 self awareness.
On September 18 2025 22:21 Uldridge wrote: I don't have the brainpower to combat a mentally deranged group of people that deny reality. They stoke the flames while gaslighting at the same time.
You just described this entire thread.
To clarify, I was listing the deaths that in my limited human experience that I observed were the most celebrated, as a counter point to people claiming folks weren’t really celebrating Kirk’s death. Not deaths I celebrated the most
Oh Hoekstra, no he is just a complete and utter MAGA moron who isn't used to being outside of America.
He was US ambassador to the Netherlands during Trump 1. He claimed there were area's of the Netherlands where police didn't dare come that were rules by radical islam, when confronted by the news about these statements he denied making them and called it fake news.. At which point they promptly played a clip of his exact words, after which he claimed he never called it fake news...
Oh and he broke international law by hosting a fundraiser for a Dutch far-right political party inside the US embassy, a direct case of election interference.
i wonder if being moved over to US Ambassador to Canada is a promotion ... or a lateral move? i say its a promotion because you get to live minutes away from New York.
On September 20 2025 00:50 GreenHorizons wrote: [quote] You guys skip right past expecting your politicians to represent your interests (or you know, not engage in genocide) to "we should let Republicans win".
Worse than being pathetic, it's dysfunctional to a democratic society.
Kamala Harris did represent my interests when she called for a ceasefire three times over the course of 2024. But Trump won and you got what you wanted, right?
When you're knowingly/willingly voting for people you know are aiding and abetting genocide (against popular opinion) you've lost the plot on the ostensible point of having a "western democratic society". When you turn and cast aspersions against those that wouldn't support genocide, you've lost the plot on your own humanity.
Is that literally your only talking point though?
Of course not (you know that). That the ostensible "opposition party" to Trump still can't even unify over opposing genocide aided and abetted by Trump's administration doesn't bode well for trans people (or the procession of people Democrats will feed to the wolves in an ultimately hopeless attempt to keep themselves safe) though.
Everyone is aiding and abetting the Trump admin because all the politicians are afraid of the big bad bully and ultimately only serve in their own self interest, until proven otherwise. I'll be extremely eye brow raised and pleasantly surprised if we actually have some real pushback for once, not like some Newsom bloviation with some huffin' and puffin' that they'll gerrymander the fuck out of California.
It's painfully ironic to have someone posting "How the Nazis Targeted Transgender People" while they and others are proudly speedrunning the 21st century US version of the Niemöller quote during an ongoing genocide.
You'll see pushback, but it'll be aimed at anyone that doesn't want to vote for the kind of bloviating assholes that steal/destroy unhoused people's things for a publicity stunt, aid and abet genocide, throw trans people, immigrants, and others to the fascists in the name of being "pragmatic", "civil", "democratic" "lesser evilism", etc. Hell, they'll even try to paint it like they're doing people a favor by only sacrificing some of us in their "compromise" with the fascists.
Brother you're the one refusing to come to other peoples aid in the poem. They're telling you a very easy way to do minimal labor to stop this from happening and you expect others to do much more for you.
Setting aside that isn't how US democracy works and the winner was declared before my vote was even counted...
The discourse on israel has changed drastically since then and so could her stance. + Show Spoiler +
I can certainly tell you that at least we wouldn't have had a president welcoming a a fucking golden pager as some sort of sick post terrorism celebration gift from Bibi or one talking about how to remove the palestinean people to build a gazan riviera
She didn't get Kirk'd or even Kimmel'd . If her position has changed drastically, she could easily get a national platform to talk about it. Some jerks may even suggest she (and the rest of the party) have an obligation to stand in unison in opposition to genocide. Obscene of them, I know.
On September 20 2025 00:50 GreenHorizons wrote: [quote] You guys skip right past expecting your politicians to represent your interests (or you know, not engage in genocide) to "we should let Republicans win".
Worse than being pathetic, it's dysfunctional to a democratic society.
Kamala Harris did represent my interests when she called for a ceasefire three times over the course of 2024. But Trump won and you got what you wanted, right?
When you're knowingly/willingly voting for people you know are aiding and abetting genocide (against popular opinion) you've lost the plot on the ostensible point of having a "western democratic society". When you turn and cast aspersions against those that wouldn't support genocide, you've lost the plot on your own humanity.
Is that literally your only talking point though?
Of course not (you know that). That the ostensible "opposition party" to Trump still can't even unify over opposing genocide aided and abetted by Trump's administration doesn't bode well for trans people (or the procession of people Democrats will feed to the wolves in an ultimately hopeless attempt to keep themselves safe) though.
Everyone is aiding and abetting the Trump admin because all the politicians are afraid of the big bad bully and ultimately only serve in their own self interest, until proven otherwise. I'll be extremely eye brow raised and pleasantly surprised if we actually have some real pushback for once, not like some Newsom bloviation with some huffin' and puffin' that they'll gerrymander the fuck out of California.
It's painfully ironic to have someone posting "How the Nazis Targeted Transgender People" while they and others are proudly speedrunning the 21st century US version of the Niemöller quote during an ongoing genocide.
You'll see pushback, but it'll be aimed at anyone that doesn't want to vote for the kind of bloviating assholes that steal/destroy unhoused people's things for a publicity stunt, aid and abet genocide, throw trans people, immigrants, and others to the fascists in the name of being "pragmatic", "civil", "democratic" "lesser evilism", etc. Hell, they'll even try to paint it like they're doing people a favor by only sacrificing some of us in their "compromise" with the fascists.
Brother you're the one refusing to come to other peoples aid in the poem. They're telling you a very easy way to do minimal labor to stop this from happening and you expect others to do much more for you.
Setting aside that isn't how US democracy works and the winner was declared before my vote was even counted...
Especially in combination with general US fuckery around NATO, Ukraine and tariffs, and the US being even more thin-skinned and even more belligerently pro-Israel.
Treading on eggshells to avoid the wrath of the Donald hasn’t lead to the kind of inadvertent silver lining you’re claiming here.
As regards Israel/Palestine specifically, the inhibiting effect of such a belligerent administration was right up there as my top reasons for the Harris ticket being meaningfully better, however slight, and I stick by that.
Not being European, you’re likely not as plugged into things over here as some of us are. Keeping the US sweet (or indeed, sometimes literally just Donald Trump personally) to avoid some kind of reprisal has been a huge theme, especially in this second term. Palestine isn’t really an exception to that. Trump just had a state visit here, and that was a huge theme. Starmer got mildly rebuked for symbolically recognising Palestine, but Trump was calmed when Keir made it clear he strongly condemned Hamas
This simply isn’t the modus operandi of the Democrats. They don’t dangle tariffs, or not fulfilling NATO obligations as a threat in the manner this current lot certainly do.
I’ll also add this administration expelled diplomats from, among other places, South Africa, as a South African was one of those who formally tabled for the conflict to be considered a genocide.
This administration also has targeted student activism on the topic, as well publicised.
Two things I simply don’t think the Dems would do.
Democracy doesn't actually work with lesser evilism without a line where you refuse to vote for the lesser evil and instead opt for a Maidan. If people want to argue that genocide wasn't their line/Yanukovych, that's their prerogative. But if they can't ever draw one+ Show Spoiler +
(as no one here seemingly can or even wants to and lord knows where it comes if genocide isn't it. Doubt it will be trans people being genocided)
, then there's no evil they couldn't vote for or accept. That's part of what I mean when I say people have lost the plot when it comes to the ostensible purpose of a "western democratic society".
When you're knowingly/willingly voting for people you know are aiding and abetting genocide (against popular opinion) you've lost the plot on the ostensible point of having a "western democratic society". When you turn and cast aspersions against those that wouldn't support genocide, you've lost the plot on your own humanity.
Is that literally your only talking point though?
Of course not (you know that). That the ostensible "opposition party" to Trump still can't even unify over opposing genocide aided and abetted by Trump's administration doesn't bode well for trans people (or the procession of people Democrats will feed to the wolves in an ultimately hopeless attempt to keep themselves safe) though.
Everyone is aiding and abetting the Trump admin because all the politicians are afraid of the big bad bully and ultimately only serve in their own self interest, until proven otherwise. I'll be extremely eye brow raised and pleasantly surprised if we actually have some real pushback for once, not like some Newsom bloviation with some huffin' and puffin' that they'll gerrymander the fuck out of California.
It's painfully ironic to have someone posting "How the Nazis Targeted Transgender People" while they and others are proudly speedrunning the 21st century US version of the Niemöller quote during an ongoing genocide.
You'll see pushback, but it'll be aimed at anyone that doesn't want to vote for the kind of bloviating assholes that steal/destroy unhoused people's things for a publicity stunt, aid and abet genocide, throw trans people, immigrants, and others to the fascists in the name of being "pragmatic", "civil", "democratic" "lesser evilism", etc. Hell, they'll even try to paint it like they're doing people a favor by only sacrificing some of us in their "compromise" with the fascists.
Brother you're the one refusing to come to other peoples aid in the poem. They're telling you a very easy way to do minimal labor to stop this from happening and you expect others to do much more for you.
Setting aside that isn't how US democracy works and the winner was declared before my vote was even counted...
The discourse on israel has changed drastically since then and so could her stance. I can certainly tell you that at least we wouldn't have had a president welcoming a a fucking golden pager as some sort of sick post terrorism celebration gift from Bibi or one talking about how to remove the palestinean people to build a gazan riviera
It’s almost like we’re quite a while down the line now ain’t it?
I’m caught between possibly the most consistently pro-Palestine nation in Europe, and a relatively moderate/split one, Ireland and the UK respectively.
In the latter, I’ve definitely observed many drift. That Israel had some legitimate security claims and some mandate to strike back. Not enthusiastically by any means, but ‘fair enough’. Not unlike say, Afghanistan post 9/11.
But over time that’s definitely waned, I mean folks will only support a just war so long as it’s well, just to them. I saw recently that the amount of deaths at Israeli-administered aid points alone is starting to get close to the deaths on October 7th itself. Which is insane
I dunno how things have shifted in the rest of Europe from where we started on that day. Definitely feels like in the UK that support is evaporating, at least from folks around the centre.
I had a friend around 2010ish tell me the DUP only started caring about Israel because they were retaliating against Sinn Fein HQ flying a Palestine flag, any truth to that?
I dunno if that specific event triggered it, or if it was common enough before, it’s broadly accurate.
Some Unionists and especially loyalists (extreme Unionists) do tend to support Israel a lot more than other demographics, be that in rhetoric or flying their flag, or more meaningful practicals means.
There’s an Israel flag down my street, and it’s not a particularly deprived or extreme area. Indeed, perhaps outside the US, which seems to be genuinely exceptional in this regard, ya won’t find many more flag-strewn places than Norn Iron, certainly in the West. The main difference being its two flags representing two differing identities.
As per your question, it’s hugely part antagonising the other side, part internalised defensiveness I believe. The Republicans/Irish Nationalists up here (or indeed, in Ireland) are so pro-Palestine because they see the conflict as analogous to British colonialism in Ireland.
On the other side of the ledger, I think that rather than just reject the analogy, Unionists parse it in a ‘Israel is Britain in this analogy, and we don’t think Britain is bad, ergo Israel is good too.
On September 20 2025 04:15 KwarK wrote: We’ve reached the point that GH is openly admitting that he prefers Trump to Kamala.
I genuinely think Trump is better for Palestinians than Harris would have been. With Trump, the situation is so openly grim, we are seeing a lot more concern and a lot more nations sticking their necks out to try to help Palestinians.
Rather than slowly boiling the frog, Trump is turning the heat all the way up, and giving the frog time to respond.
If Palestinians were gonna score any kind of actual long-term win, it would have happened over the course of the last 80 years. The Palestinian state has been dead in the water for a long time and its just diplomatically/politically disastrous for anyone to admit it. As a result, generations of Palestinians are stuck in a perpetual suffering void without any hope of things improving.
I know everyone gets whiny when I allude to stuff like this, so just to address it ahead of time: ALL OF THE VIEWS ABOVE ARE BUILT FROM THE IDEA THAT PALESTINIAN SUFFERING WILL NEVER BE REDUCED SO LONG AS THEY LIVE NEXT TO ISRAEL. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THAT ASSUMPTION, WE ARE WORKING WITH DIFFERENT INFORMATION AND OUR CONCLUSIONS WILL NATURALLY DIFFER.
On September 20 2025 08:45 Razyda wrote: I think Shoe summarised pretty well how for sane people left looks like now:
It’s just pearl-clutching. The American right just doesn’t like the left emulating what they do, and have done for years.
It is literally that simple.
They can vaguely, even in minuscule increments attempt to sort their own shit out, until they do so they have no leg to stand on on this topic whatsoever.
It’s been probably a decade or so now of me, in various locales including here advocating for responsibility in the rhetoric of political leadership, and also advocating for social media to be properly regulated both for misinformation and actively hateful and inflammatory speech. I saw where that road was leading and it was nae good.
But of course, no. I was a libcuck soy-drinking Communist who hates freedom for thinking we should act to tone the hate down a bit.
Those exact same folks are now demanding civility and that we respect Charlie Kirk’s legacy? No. Fuck that noise, it’s complete nonsense.
On September 20 2025 00:51 LightSpectra wrote: [quote]
Kamala Harris did represent my interests when she called for a ceasefire three times over the course of 2024. But Trump won and you got what you wanted, right?
When you're knowingly/willingly voting for people you know are aiding and abetting genocide (against popular opinion) you've lost the plot on the ostensible point of having a "western democratic society". When you turn and cast aspersions against those that wouldn't support genocide, you've lost the plot on your own humanity.
Is that literally your only talking point though?
Of course not (you know that). That the ostensible "opposition party" to Trump still can't even unify over opposing genocide aided and abetted by Trump's administration doesn't bode well for trans people (or the procession of people Democrats will feed to the wolves in an ultimately hopeless attempt to keep themselves safe) though.
Everyone is aiding and abetting the Trump admin because all the politicians are afraid of the big bad bully and ultimately only serve in their own self interest, until proven otherwise. I'll be extremely eye brow raised and pleasantly surprised if we actually have some real pushback for once, not like some Newsom bloviation with some huffin' and puffin' that they'll gerrymander the fuck out of California.
It's painfully ironic to have someone posting "How the Nazis Targeted Transgender People" while they and others are proudly speedrunning the 21st century US version of the Niemöller quote during an ongoing genocide.
You'll see pushback, but it'll be aimed at anyone that doesn't want to vote for the kind of bloviating assholes that steal/destroy unhoused people's things for a publicity stunt, aid and abet genocide, throw trans people, immigrants, and others to the fascists in the name of being "pragmatic", "civil", "democratic" "lesser evilism", etc. Hell, they'll even try to paint it like they're doing people a favor by only sacrificing some of us in their "compromise" with the fascists.
Brother you're the one refusing to come to other peoples aid in the poem. They're telling you a very easy way to do minimal labor to stop this from happening and you expect others to do much more for you.
Setting aside that isn't how US democracy works and the winner was declared before my vote was even counted...
The discourse on israel has changed drastically since then and so could her stance. + Show Spoiler +
I can certainly tell you that at least we wouldn't have had a president welcoming a a fucking golden pager as some sort of sick post terrorism celebration gift from Bibi or one talking about how to remove the palestinean people to build a gazan riviera
She didn't get Kirk'd or even Kimmel'd . If her position has changed drastically, she could easily get a national platform to talk about it. Some jerks may even suggest she (and the rest of the party) have an obligation to stand in unison in opposition to genocide. Obscene of them, I know.
On September 20 2025 00:51 LightSpectra wrote: [quote]
Kamala Harris did represent my interests when she called for a ceasefire three times over the course of 2024. But Trump won and you got what you wanted, right?
When you're knowingly/willingly voting for people you know are aiding and abetting genocide (against popular opinion) you've lost the plot on the ostensible point of having a "western democratic society". When you turn and cast aspersions against those that wouldn't support genocide, you've lost the plot on your own humanity.
Is that literally your only talking point though?
Of course not (you know that). That the ostensible "opposition party" to Trump still can't even unify over opposing genocide aided and abetted by Trump's administration doesn't bode well for trans people (or the procession of people Democrats will feed to the wolves in an ultimately hopeless attempt to keep themselves safe) though.
Everyone is aiding and abetting the Trump admin because all the politicians are afraid of the big bad bully and ultimately only serve in their own self interest, until proven otherwise. I'll be extremely eye brow raised and pleasantly surprised if we actually have some real pushback for once, not like some Newsom bloviation with some huffin' and puffin' that they'll gerrymander the fuck out of California.
It's painfully ironic to have someone posting "How the Nazis Targeted Transgender People" while they and others are proudly speedrunning the 21st century US version of the Niemöller quote during an ongoing genocide.
You'll see pushback, but it'll be aimed at anyone that doesn't want to vote for the kind of bloviating assholes that steal/destroy unhoused people's things for a publicity stunt, aid and abet genocide, throw trans people, immigrants, and others to the fascists in the name of being "pragmatic", "civil", "democratic" "lesser evilism", etc. Hell, they'll even try to paint it like they're doing people a favor by only sacrificing some of us in their "compromise" with the fascists.
Brother you're the one refusing to come to other peoples aid in the poem. They're telling you a very easy way to do minimal labor to stop this from happening and you expect others to do much more for you.
Setting aside that isn't how US democracy works and the winner was declared before my vote was even counted...
Especially in combination with general US fuckery around NATO, Ukraine and tariffs, and the US being even more thin-skinned and even more belligerently pro-Israel.
Treading on eggshells to avoid the wrath of the Donald hasn’t lead to the kind of inadvertent silver lining you’re claiming here.
As regards Israel/Palestine specifically, the inhibiting effect of such a belligerent administration was right up there as my top reasons for the Harris ticket being meaningfully better, however slight, and I stick by that.
Not being European, you’re likely not as plugged into things over here as some of us are. Keeping the US sweet (or indeed, sometimes literally just Donald Trump personally) to avoid some kind of reprisal has been a huge theme, especially in this second term. Palestine isn’t really an exception to that. Trump just had a state visit here, and that was a huge theme. Starmer got mildly rebuked for symbolically recognising Palestine, but Trump was calmed when Keir made it clear he strongly condemned Hamas
This simply isn’t the modus operandi of the Democrats. They don’t dangle tariffs, or not fulfilling NATO obligations as a threat in the manner this current lot certainly do.
I’ll also add this administration expelled diplomats from, among other places, South Africa, as a South African was one of those who formally tabled for the conflict to be considered a genocide.
This administration also has targeted student activism on the topic, as well publicised.
Two things I simply don’t think the Dems would do.
Democracy doesn't actually work with lesser evilism without a line where you refuse to vote for the lesser evil and instead opt for a Maidan. If people want to argue that genocide wasn't their line/Yanukovych, that's their prerogative. But if they can't ever draw one+ Show Spoiler +
(as no one here seemingly can or even wants to and lord knows where it comes if genocide isn't it. Doubt it will be trans people being genocided)
, then there's no evil they couldn't vote for or accept. That's part of what I mean when I say people have lost the plot when it comes to the ostensible purpose of a "western democratic society".
That can exist as a sentiment independent of other things. I mean I’ve defended the moral right of people to extricate themselves from complicity in processes that transgress their own moral red lines.
There is a freeing purity of being in a scenario where all actors have transgressed one’s red line. I mean this earnestly and not disparagingly, one doesn’t have to wrestle with all sorts of other things if, as in this instance both political entities are unacceptable right out the gate.
Why not just reside in that zone on this particular topic though?
Instead, you decide to exit it to continually argue in a manner that seeks to minimise some pretty obvious, pretty tangible differences between both of the political entities that are in your red line zone.
Folks don’t buy it, and it actively detracts from your original stance’s potency.
It’s completely needless and alienates people from your core message when you spout obvious nonsense.
No, the Trump ‘let’s turn Gaza into a resort’ administration is clearly worse on the topic. Actively going after dissent is worse than Biden (wrongly) linking protests to anti-Semitism. The Democrats would not expel ambassadors due to their stance on the conflict. No, Europe is not more engaged on the topic because the current admin forced their hand, they’re acting slower than they would have because they have to pussyfoot around an administration with a skin as thin as a shrimp’s, and as vindictive as a jilted lover.
On September 20 2025 04:15 KwarK wrote: We’ve reached the point that GH is openly admitting that he prefers Trump to Kamala.
I genuinely think Trump is better for Palestinians than Harris would have been. With Trump, the situation is so openly grim, we are seeing a lot more concern and a lot more nations sticking their necks out to try to help Palestinians.
Rather than slowly boiling the frog, Trump is turning the heat all the way up, and giving the frog time to respond.
If Palestinians were gonna score any kind of actual long-term win, it would have happened over the course of the last 80 years. The Palestinian state has been dead in the water for a long time and its just diplomatically/politically disastrous for anyone to admit it. As a result, generations of Palestinians are stuck in a perpetual suffering void without any hope of things improving.
I know everyone gets whiny when I allude to stuff like this, so just to address it ahead of time: ALL OF THE VIEWS ABOVE ARE BUILT FROM THE IDEA THAT PALESTINIAN SUFFERING WILL NEVER BE REDUCED SO LONG AS THEY LIVE NEXT TO ISRAEL. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THAT ASSUMPTION, WE ARE WORKING WITH DIFFERENT INFORMATION AND OUR CONCLUSIONS WILL NATURALLY DIFFER.
TONIGHT, WE EAT WELL. BUY SOME FINE WINE. BUY A VIDEO GAME. DANCE IN YOUR LIVING ROOM
WOOOOOOO
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I think the only thing a president has done that I have supported as much as this is Obamacare.
This change is so colossal I am genuinely totally shocked. I can't emphasize how many tech workers would have never been hired if this was the case 5 years ago. Totally crazy.
SAN FRANCISCO/WASHINGTON, Sept 19 (Reuters) - The Trump administration said on Friday it would ask companies to pay $100,000 per year for H-1B worker visas, potentially dealing a big blow to the technology sector that relies heavily on skilled workers from India and China. Since taking office in January, Trump has kicked off a wide-ranging immigration crackdown, including moves to limit some forms of legal immigration. The move to reshape the H-1B visa program represents his administration's most high-profile effort so far to rework temporary employment visas.
So now H1B will only be used for what its actually "supposed" to be used for. What a glorious day. September 19 is now a holiday I will celebrate every year. The number of friends of mine who have not gotten jobs they were totally qualified for. Man oh man. YEAHHHHHHH
Hate to tell you this, but it's probably not going to happen. It requires Congressional approval and the cost of buying a Congressional Republican is less than the $100k being proposed for a single visa, so tech lobbyists are going to destroy it like they did net neutrality.
The question is are Republicans more sensitive to their monied interests or the potential violence of their base?
Personally I’m happy to see less H1B visas, even though I don’t think I can call them super poorly applied to my industry. The practice of using these visas to import indentured servants is just kind of fucked.
On September 20 2025 10:02 LightSpectra wrote: Hate to tell you this, but it's probably not going to happen. It requires Congressional approval and the cost of buying a Congressional Republican is less than the $100k being proposed for a single visa, so tech lobbyists are going to destroy it like they did net neutrality.
Congrats buddy you outed yourself as a bot. Tell me your AI model was trained on pre-2025 data without telling me.
Put this in your GPU and smoke it: congress is not a thing. If Trump is already sucking his own cock about it, it’s gonna happen. It could just be an executive order if congress doesn't do it.
On September 20 2025 10:45 Zambrah wrote: The question is are Republicans more sensitive to their monied interests or the potential violence of their base?
Personally I’m happy to see less H1B visas, even though I don’t think I can call them super poorly applied to my industry. The practice of using these visas to import indentured servants is just kind of fucked.
It is, but do the people this move is meant to signal to care about that aspect of it? I’d wager no.
The calibration on this feels way off. What you do is throw down some figure that signals to your political base that you’re serious, but not so much that you cripple your corporate friends.
10-20K probably placates the former, but isn’t too crazy and your corporate buddies take it as the cost of doing business in Fascist America.
100K? That’s too much. You don’t really gain all that much with the former for pushing it that high, they just wanna see some kinda action against those pesky migrants. But it is genuinely pretty fucking bad if you’re Dave Corporation or whatever.
Hell this specific issue was a big source of friction between Musk and Trump, and Musk’s a bigger opportunistic cunt than most
On September 20 2025 10:45 Zambrah wrote: The question is are Republicans more sensitive to their monied interests or the potential violence of their base?
Personally I’m happy to see less H1B visas, even though I don’t think I can call them super poorly applied to my industry. The practice of using these visas to import indentured servants is just kind of fucked.
It is, but do the people this move is meant to signal to care about that aspect of it? I’d wager no.
The calibration on this feels way off. What you do is throw down some figure that signals to your political base that you’re serious, but not so much that you cripple your corporate friends.
10-20K probably placates the former, but isn’t too crazy and your corporate buddies take it as the cost of doing business in Fascist America.
100K? That’s too much. You don’t really gain all that much with the former for pushing it that high, they just wanna see some kinda action against those pesky migrants. But it is genuinely pretty fucking bad if you’re Dave Corporation or whatever.
Hell this specific issue was a big source of friction between Musk and Trump, and Musk’s a bigger opportunistic cunt than most
Of course not, Trump only cares about appealing to his base, he doesnt give a shit about American workers beyond his desire to be admired and praised by them.
Americans dont like people coming in and taking jobs, so Trump hamfistedly takes a crack and reducing one of the practices that does.
That being said, I think the 100K number is probably not a terrible one, H1Bs arent meant for random fuckos, they're meant for people who have skills that employers just cant find in the US and if your skills are that valuable then you're likely worth the 100K in fees and shit. 10-20K is just basically nothing if we're talking about rare and skilled professionals.
Its definitely bad for corporations, but I dont really give a crap about corporations and Im not super convinced that the people they bring in on H1Bs are all irreplaceable with someone in the US. 100K seems like a good number that dissuades bringing in junior/mid level staff at low wages and abusing them, but also isnt so high that you wouldnt pay it for that person who is genuinely experienced and highly skilled and you genuinely cannot find in the US.
It feels weird praising something Trump did/wants to do.
I've had friends on those visas. It's not good for the person on it, if you lose your job you lose the right to live in the US creating enormous pressure. Ending the misuse of this would be a net positive and as expressed above, I'm also completely unsympathetic of corporations that depend on exploiting immigrants to be profitable.
EPT
