|
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.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On March 27 2026 18:15 baal wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 13:32 Razyda wrote:
@baal I dont think you understand your situation.
You arguing with people who will tell you that Trump ban is fine because it is private platform, then complain that Musk banned someone from his platform. You arguing with people who believe that speech which lead to harm should be banned but are first to call others nazis, racists, child rapists, fascists.
You essentially arguing with people who somehow believe that if you tell somebody to " go f...k yourself" and then somebody rip of their d...k trying to show it up his a....s, the problem is your speech, but when they say "do x next" it is x who is the problem.
The reason I came back to tl.net was because BlackJack send me a PM asking me to come post in the politics thread but it didn't take long before I realized it was too late, Constantinople had fallen, but alas here I am, last man standing swinging my sword against the horde of reddit-brained barbarians until the ban-hammer inevitably gets me.
Why would anyone invite you here to swing swords at people in the first place. Or why would you do that.
That‘s like outing yourself as a propagandist.
The hell is Constantinople even.
|
On March 27 2026 20:21 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 18:15 baal wrote:On March 27 2026 13:32 Razyda wrote:
@baal I dont think you understand your situation.
You arguing with people who will tell you that Trump ban is fine because it is private platform, then complain that Musk banned someone from his platform. You arguing with people who believe that speech which lead to harm should be banned but are first to call others nazis, racists, child rapists, fascists.
You essentially arguing with people who somehow believe that if you tell somebody to " go f...k yourself" and then somebody rip of their d...k trying to show it up his a....s, the problem is your speech, but when they say "do x next" it is x who is the problem.
The reason I came back to tl.net was because BlackJack send me a PM asking me to come post in the politics thread but it didn't take long before I realized it was too late, Constantinople had fallen, but alas here I am, last man standing swinging my sword against the horde of reddit-brained barbarians until the ban-hammer inevitably gets me. Why would anyone invite you here to swing swords at people in the first place. Or why would you do that. That‘s like outing yourself as a propagandist. The hell is Constantinople even.
In their racist heads, they (right wingers) see themselves as defenders of the white, Christian world against Muslim (and in this case also woke) hordes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Constantinople
You can see references to it by the Christchurch shooter:
He threatens Turkey in his manifesto, saying: “We are coming for Constantinople [using the historical name for Istanbul] and we will destroy every mosque and minaret in the city. Hagia Sophia will be free of minarets and Constantinople will be rightfully Christian owned once more.”
Our guy here just went mask off, obviously one of the "hiding their power level" guys, compared to baal, oBlade looks like a well adjusted and normal individual.
|
On March 27 2026 20:26 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 20:21 Vivax wrote:On March 27 2026 18:15 baal wrote:On March 27 2026 13:32 Razyda wrote:
@baal I dont think you understand your situation.
You arguing with people who will tell you that Trump ban is fine because it is private platform, then complain that Musk banned someone from his platform. You arguing with people who believe that speech which lead to harm should be banned but are first to call others nazis, racists, child rapists, fascists.
You essentially arguing with people who somehow believe that if you tell somebody to " go f...k yourself" and then somebody rip of their d...k trying to show it up his a....s, the problem is your speech, but when they say "do x next" it is x who is the problem.
The reason I came back to tl.net was because BlackJack send me a PM asking me to come post in the politics thread but it didn't take long before I realized it was too late, Constantinople had fallen, but alas here I am, last man standing swinging my sword against the horde of reddit-brained barbarians until the ban-hammer inevitably gets me. Why would anyone invite you here to swing swords at people in the first place. Or why would you do that. That‘s like outing yourself as a propagandist. The hell is Constantinople even. In their racist heads, they (right wingers) see themselves as defenders of the white, Christian world against Muslim (and in this case also woke) hordes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_ConstantinopleYou can see references to it by the Christchurch shooter: Show nested quote +He threatens Turkey in his manifesto, saying: “We are coming for Constantinople [using the historical name for Istanbul] and we will destroy every mosque and minaret in the city. Hagia Sophia will be free of minarets and Constantinople will be rightfully Christian owned once more.” Our guy here just went mask off, obviously one of the "hiding their power level" guys, compared to baal, oBlade looks like a well adjusted and normal individual.
Don't listen to him baal. As an anarcho-capitalist Hispanic you're notably different than a white supremacist mass murderer in New Zealand. Normal people just scroll past the toxic BS.
|
On March 27 2026 18:06 baal wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 16:47 EnDeR_ wrote:Mishandling is a strong word. There are many reasons for the rise of antivaxxers during the pandemic, but the main one was that social media allowed reaching a much bigger audience. Here is a good source about this. I think it's the mildest word I can come up with with how many governments reacted to the pandemic, I think its an ode to state incompetence. From under reacting to geometric threats to turning a brief "flatten the curve" lockdown to a 2 year one, where they allowed BLM rallies but also stay at home, so many retarded useless policies etc. Of course social media gives a bigger audience, its a megaphone, also pro-vaccination gets the megaphone too.Show nested quote +For me the really problematic stuff is this: Much of the anti-vaccine information on social media moved through networks of so-called influencers.26 Some were long-time anti-vaccine activists and others had established their audiences in wellness, politics, parenting, or other spheres. Many of these influencers are ideologically motivated, but some, including several prominent anti-vaccine influencers, profit from their audiences by selling anti-vaccine books and products (eg, alternative treatments), and monetising websites with advertising revenue or affiliate links to anti-vaccine groups.26 In at least one case, influencers selling anti-vaccine products founded a medical freedom-focused super political action committee.27 The short term fix for this sort of thing is deplatforming. But to truly fix the problem, regulation needs to be put forward to tune the algorithms away from addictive maximum engagement. I hope that with the new rulings, this will give it enough momentum to get something done. Yeah its sad that so many ppl are antivaxxers, freedom gives people the chance to make dumb choices, like wanting the government to control social media algorithms.
Considering the complexity and scale of the problem, dealing with COVID was always going to be difficult. Not all interventions were successful, but it wasn't all bad. Operation warp speed was a huge success, for instance, and something I'm very grateful for.
Regarding the bolded; it is not quite the same. A message of "vaccines continue to be effective" generates a lot less engagement than "they're coming for your kids"; algorithms are biased to promote unusual content because that generates more engagement. There's a whole industry of people that have figured out how to get you to engage; i mean it's the whole basis of "click-bait".
I am not arguing for the creation of a government department of social media control. I do think that we need laws regulating how social media functions separate from more traditional communication media because it's just not the same and there is clear evidence that the way it functions now is harmful to many of its users.
|
On March 27 2026 16:00 baal wrote:
The fact that you insist on calling an antiparasitic developed for humans "horse dewormer" instead of acknowleding it was a play to persuade people to not take it makes it crystal clear that you don't have any intellectual integrity whatsoever.
It was available as a prescription in pill form for humans. The paste form that sold out during the pandemic though?
Related contemporary headline:
Ivermectin shortage because of false Covid cure claims may result in animals being sent to slaughter
If I might draw your attention to:
"But, thanks to stocks of ANIMAL-GRADE ivermectin being purchased by those who believe it will prevent them from falling ill with coronavirus, there is now a shortage of the drug for use in animals."
Why are you so mad about people factually correct in referring to it as horse dewormer rather than the liars who actually got people killed by calling it a COVID cure? Please, walk me through it, I want to understand your logic.
"The use of masks is not needed"
The context was for uninfected people, during a mask shortage where health care workers didn't have enough. That's the thing you demonstrably were wrong about. There's a limited amount of resources, so they need to be prioritized to healthcare workers and infected people first. At no point did Fauci ever suggest that masks don't work.
The government correcting course based in new cutting edge scientific data, nothing to do with procuring supply to medical staff, not at all, nothing to see here.
He literally said aloud in the interview you're alleging was some conspiracy cover-up that he didn't want uninfected people wearing masks when there was a shortage for medical staff, lmao.
On March 27 2026 16:34 baal wrote:
Antivaxxers used to be a left wing idea of hippies who usually dislike allopathy, but when vaccines become a government mandate it was taken over by right wingers who dislike government control.
Numerous vaccines were mandatory before COVID to go to public school and join the military. So how come those didn't fuel right-wing rage?
|
Can i get my ban now pretty plz cherry on top. So i never get tempted again.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On March 27 2026 13:32 Razyda wrote:
FFS
"Two high-profile progressive lawmakers introduced a bill Wednesday that would pause new data centers in the United States until national safeguards are in place to protect workers and consumers and ensure the technologies don’t harm the environment."
This is basically saying that government decides which AI companies get to build data centers.
Why did you share this quote when the sentence that follows has nothing to do with it?
You arguing with people who will tell you that Trump ban is fine because it is private platform, then complain that Musk banned someone from his platform.
Trump violated the terms of service by inciting violence. Hurting Elon Musk's feelings doesn't appear to be part of the terms of service, but it may have changed since I last checked.
|
On March 27 2026 22:00 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 20:26 Jankisa wrote:On March 27 2026 20:21 Vivax wrote:On March 27 2026 18:15 baal wrote:On March 27 2026 13:32 Razyda wrote:
@baal I dont think you understand your situation.
You arguing with people who will tell you that Trump ban is fine because it is private platform, then complain that Musk banned someone from his platform. You arguing with people who believe that speech which lead to harm should be banned but are first to call others nazis, racists, child rapists, fascists.
You essentially arguing with people who somehow believe that if you tell somebody to " go f...k yourself" and then somebody rip of their d...k trying to show it up his a....s, the problem is your speech, but when they say "do x next" it is x who is the problem.
The reason I came back to tl.net was because BlackJack send me a PM asking me to come post in the politics thread but it didn't take long before I realized it was too late, Constantinople had fallen, but alas here I am, last man standing swinging my sword against the horde of reddit-brained barbarians until the ban-hammer inevitably gets me. Why would anyone invite you here to swing swords at people in the first place. Or why would you do that. That‘s like outing yourself as a propagandist. The hell is Constantinople even. In their racist heads, they (right wingers) see themselves as defenders of the white, Christian world against Muslim (and in this case also woke) hordes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_ConstantinopleYou can see references to it by the Christchurch shooter: He threatens Turkey in his manifesto, saying: “We are coming for Constantinople [using the historical name for Istanbul] and we will destroy every mosque and minaret in the city. Hagia Sophia will be free of minarets and Constantinople will be rightfully Christian owned once more.” Our guy here just went mask off, obviously one of the "hiding their power level" guys, compared to baal, oBlade looks like a well adjusted and normal individual. Don't listen to him baal. As an anarcho-capitalist Hispanic you're notably different than a white supremacist mass murderer in New Zealand. Normal people just scroll past the toxic BS.
I find it very cute how you immediately came to defense of your fellow white supremacist / ethno nationalist.
Also pretty cool that as soon as the fact that you guys are more or less ideologically aligned with guys like the Christchurch guy and Breivik was pointed out you had to come to make sure that everyone knows there are "notable differences".
On March 27 2026 22:07 pmh wrote:
Bunch of sociopaths and psychopaths in this thread. Very low iq as well. Lots of midwittery. Its written and formulated well but the takes show understanding of highschool lvl or they are flat out wrong and false. They dont see their stupid mistakes and when point out the reaction is predictably terrible like with all sociopaths.
Can i get my ban now pretty plz cherry on top. So i never get tempted again.
Baal has some decent takes oblade as well. Baal also has few terrible takes though but no point arguing. The fake liberals in this thread are the biggest sociopaths. And i say this as a european liberal.
Always liked gh still do. Dont ask me why i cant explain.
Anyway ban now plz and cya take care.
Then we have this, it's hilarious that someone who goes for "you are sociopaths and psychopaths" and "low IQ" is trying to insult people by saying they have high school understanding.
And, of course, the age long tradition of victim-hood, again, in full display.
Bravo guys, haha, what a bunch of walking cliches.
EDIT: And the brave sir @pmh bravely self censored when he read his stupid post, well, here it is buddy, for everyone to enjoy, very happy I quoted it before you courageously deleted it.
|
According to oBlade, pointing out that someone's rhetoric looks suspiciously similar to a mass murderer's is "toxic BS." Wonder where that energy was when baal explicitly said he was hoping for a terrorist attack in Mexico.
|
On March 27 2026 22:34 Jankisa wrote:
I find it very cute how you immediately came to defense of your fellow white supremacist / ethno nationalist.
are you the guy who said i was anti semitic without a source? one can't just matter-of-factly throw this stuff around; one must provide evidence. there is zero evidence i am anti-semitic.
There is a metric tonne of evidence i spend a lot of time time hanging out with jews.
I'll be in B'nai Brith Canada HQ this weekend. I'll take some pictures. Let's see if I can sneak past all their security screenings 
|
On March 27 2026 22:34 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 22:00 oBlade wrote:On March 27 2026 20:26 Jankisa wrote:On March 27 2026 20:21 Vivax wrote:On March 27 2026 18:15 baal wrote:On March 27 2026 13:32 Razyda wrote:
@baal I dont think you understand your situation.
You arguing with people who will tell you that Trump ban is fine because it is private platform, then complain that Musk banned someone from his platform. You arguing with people who believe that speech which lead to harm should be banned but are first to call others nazis, racists, child rapists, fascists.
You essentially arguing with people who somehow believe that if you tell somebody to " go f...k yourself" and then somebody rip of their d...k trying to show it up his a....s, the problem is your speech, but when they say "do x next" it is x who is the problem.
The reason I came back to tl.net was because BlackJack send me a PM asking me to come post in the politics thread but it didn't take long before I realized it was too late, Constantinople had fallen, but alas here I am, last man standing swinging my sword against the horde of reddit-brained barbarians until the ban-hammer inevitably gets me. Why would anyone invite you here to swing swords at people in the first place. Or why would you do that. That‘s like outing yourself as a propagandist. The hell is Constantinople even. In their racist heads, they (right wingers) see themselves as defenders of the white, Christian world against Muslim (and in this case also woke) hordes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_ConstantinopleYou can see references to it by the Christchurch shooter: He threatens Turkey in his manifesto, saying: “We are coming for Constantinople [using the historical name for Istanbul] and we will destroy every mosque and minaret in the city. Hagia Sophia will be free of minarets and Constantinople will be rightfully Christian owned once more.” Our guy here just went mask off, obviously one of the "hiding their power level" guys, compared to baal, oBlade looks like a well adjusted and normal individual. Don't listen to him baal. As an anarcho-capitalist Hispanic you're notably different than a white supremacist mass murderer in New Zealand. Normal people just scroll past the toxic BS. I find it very cute how you immediately came to defense of your fellow white supremacist / ethno nationalist. Also pretty cool that as soon as the fact that you guys are more or less ideologically aligned with guys like the Christchurch guy and Breivik was pointed out you had to come to make sure that everyone knows there are "notable differences".
Baal and I are not ideologically aligned with each other, let alone with a bunch of mass murderers.
On March 27 2026 22:38 LightSpectra wrote:
According to oBlade, pointing out that someone's rhetoric looks suspiciously similar to a mass murderer's is "toxic BS." Wonder where that energy was when baal explicitly said he was hoping for a terrorist attack in Mexico.
Anything looks suspicious to someone who has to Wikipedia what Constantinople is.
|
If you wikipedia what Constantinople is, you'd find out it wasn't fallen by "barbarians" like baal was implying but the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were more technologically and scientifically advanced than the Roman (Byzantine) Empire was, so one wonders what would inspire someone to describe them like that.
|
On March 27 2026 23:20 LightSpectra wrote:
If you wikipedia what Constantinople is, you'd find out it wasn't fallen by "barbarians" like baal was implying but the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were more technologically and scientifically advanced than the Roman (Byzantine) Empire was, so one wonders what would inspire someone to describe them like that.
First, the act of attacking someone's city and taking it can be argued to be barbaric per se.
Otherwise, this reading requires simultaneously believing baal was also implying the Ottoman Empire were "reddit-brained." Since that wouldn't make sense, your tangent is based on rhetorical manipulation.
|
On March 27 2026 23:44 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 23:20 LightSpectra wrote:
If you wikipedia what Constantinople is, you'd find out it wasn't fallen by "barbarians" like baal was implying but the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were more technologically and scientifically advanced than the Roman (Byzantine) Empire was, so one wonders what would inspire someone to describe them like that. First, the act of attacking someone's city and taking it can be argued to be barbaric per se.
Setting aside that you're talking about the Roman Empire, which conquered more land and cities than the Ottomans did, this is a supremely funny opinion to hold while defending a president that repeatedly threatened to annex Greenland and numerous other places.
Otherwise, this reading requires simultaneously believing baal was also implying the Ottoman Empire were "reddit-brained." Since that wouldn't make sense, your tangent is based on rhetorical manipulation.
That is actually exactly what he implied.
"BlackJack send me a PM asking me to come post in the politics thread but it didn't take long before I realized it was too late, Constantinople had fallen, but alas here I am, last man standing swinging my sword against the horde of reddit-brained barbarians until the ban-hammer inevitably gets me."
And you're right, it doesn't make sense. Does baal have some supernatural guarantee that everything he says will make sense? You know people can say things that don't make sense, right?
|
On March 27 2026 23:02 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 22:34 Jankisa wrote:
I find it very cute how you immediately came to defense of your fellow white supremacist / ethno nationalist.
are you the guy who said i was anti semitic without a source? one can't just matter-of-factly throw this stuff around; one must provide evidence. there is zero evidence i am anti-semitic. There is a metric tonne of evidence i spend a lot of time time hanging out with jews. I'll be in B'nai Brith Canada HQ this weekend. I'll take some pictures. Let's see if I can sneak past all their security screenings
Buddy, I referred you back to many of your posts where you posted anti-Semitic conspiracies and explained how that makes you an anti-Semite.
Same way I can say that oBlade is a great replacement conspiracy theorist, fascist and ethno-nationalist based on his fandom of Tucker Carlson and his support for fascist methods and racial profiling of ICE.
On March 27 2026 23:44 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 23:20 LightSpectra wrote:
If you wikipedia what Constantinople is, you'd find out it wasn't fallen by "barbarians" like baal was implying but the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were more technologically and scientifically advanced than the Roman (Byzantine) Empire was, so one wonders what would inspire someone to describe them like that. First, the act of attacking someone's city and taking it can be argued to be barbaric per se.Otherwise, this reading requires simultaneously believing baal was also implying the Ottoman Empire were "reddit-brained." Since that wouldn't make sense, your tangent is based on rhetorical manipulation.
The "tangent" is a reply clarifying to people not familiar with ethno-nationalist bullshit where did this brain rot originate:
"Constantinople had fallen, but alas here I am, last man standing swinging my sword against the horde of reddit-brained barbarians"
As always, your reaction is to construct a strawman where me linking a wikipedia page on the fall of an ancient City means that I "had to google it".
No, buddy, just like I recognize your fascist rhetoric originating from you being a Tucker Carlson super-fan I recognize the ethno-nationalist and white supremacist rhetoric from baal, especially since it's 1:1 consistent with all the other grievances he was airing here ever since he was paged by someone to come and spill his vile bullshit here.
|
On March 27 2026 23:56 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 23:44 oBlade wrote:On March 27 2026 23:20 LightSpectra wrote:
If you wikipedia what Constantinople is, you'd find out it wasn't fallen by "barbarians" like baal was implying but the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were more technologically and scientifically advanced than the Roman (Byzantine) Empire was, so one wonders what would inspire someone to describe them like that. First, the act of attacking someone's city and taking it can be argued to be barbaric per se. Setting aside that you're talking about the Roman Empire, which conquered more land and cities than the Ottomans did, this is a supremely funny opinion to hold while defending a president that repeatedly threatened to annex Greenland and numerous other places.
Greatest empire measuring contests aside, I'm pretty sure the Romans were more advanced than most people they conquered. In fact, I know the US is more advanced than Greenland as well. No offense to Greenland. So your point sort of vanishes.
|
The Romans in 1453 were not more advanced than the Ottoman Empire. And while it's true that Greenland doesn't have as many scientists and technologists as the United States does, they at least know that child molesters don't make for good leaders. So at least in that respect they're more advanced.
|
On March 27 2026 23:44 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 23:20 LightSpectra wrote:
If you wikipedia what Constantinople is, you'd find out it wasn't fallen by "barbarians" like baal was implying but the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were more technologically and scientifically advanced than the Roman (Byzantine) Empire was, so one wonders what would inspire someone to describe them like that. First, the act of attacking someone's city and taking it can be argued to be barbaric per se.Otherwise, this reading requires simultaneously believing baal was also implying the Ottoman Empire were "reddit-brained." Since that wouldn't make sense, your tangent is based on rhetorical manipulation.
Who are you to claim the Ottoman Empire wasn't reddit-brained ?
Janissaries with thick neckbeards and rudimentary firebombs.
|
On March 27 2026 14:36 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 09:22 Fleetfeet wrote:On March 27 2026 04:33 EnDeR_ wrote:On March 27 2026 04:06 WombaT wrote:On March 27 2026 02:11 EnDeR_ wrote:On March 26 2026 22:32 LightSpectra wrote:
It was Gen X and Millennials who grew up in a world where the far-right was still the fringe of politics, and the "just let them make fools of themselves, trying to ban them will only embolden them" seemed to be sensible advice from our parents that grew up in a world where the Nazis and Fascists seemed to be permanently vanquished.
So it turns out that was complete hogwash, regrettably. Society still has time to update our collective wisdom to something more evidence-based but it's not surprising a lot of people are resistant to such a thing. Millennial here (not by much tho) and I very much believed in my younger days that people's minds could be changed if convincing evidence could be provided. As a scientist, this felt like a self-evident truth. I sympathise with Baal's position in truth. I don't think he's being malicious, he just thinks people are better than they truly are and that's a nice sentiment. I mean it’s the intuitive position after all. And it still works, provided, to my understanding that an individual hasn’t formed some kind of reasonably strong emotional attachment to a belief, or wider belief system. It seems the current ecosystem, complex as it is does somewhat seem to rather bolt seemingly unrelated phenomena to particular belief systems. And in many cases that fusing is not reversible past a point. There should be no real reason that belief in the efficacy of certain vaccines etc should serve as a (reasonably) accurate gauge of someone’s wider political beliefs. But you’d have to be a lunatic to deny that was rather evident, specially in Covid times! There is also another option too, the brain effectively ends up deceiving itself. Cognitive dissonance in the real sense of the term. Someone does believe in x y or z, let’s say: 1. Vaccines are real, other COVID countermeasures are legit 2. I’m a decent person. 3. I wanna do my shit, despite recognising there’s potential harmful consequences to others. Well, the easiest way out of that bind is to drop belief 1). You resolve the conflict (and the cognitive dissonance) between beliefs 2 and 3 because it becomes moot if you no longer hold belief 1. I think part of why COVID was such a minefield in this domain was because of the clear clashes between personal autonomy and the public good. One has to draw their lines somewhere, but that will invite the judgement of others. It’d be interesting to see how we’d fare if there was some existential WW3 kinda deal now. You’d probably see folks noping out of service with the rationale it wasn’t really happening at all For me, part of the problem is social media's self-reinforcement loops and engagement-based algorithm which draws people in into these communities, making it more likely that outlandish ideas become part of their identity which is very hard to come back from. I mean, take this: some fuckwit figures out they can make a ton of cash pushing the concept of "wild births", the Free Birth Society (FBS), a business that promotes freebirth. Unlike home birth – birth at home with a midwife in attendance – freebirth means giving birth without any medical support. FBS promotes a version widely seen as extreme, even among freebirth advocates: it is anti-ultrasound, which it falsely claims harms babies, downplays serious medical conditions and promotes wild pregnancy, meaning pregnancy without any prenatal care.
FBS was founded by ex-doula Emilee Saldaya, and most women find it through its podcast, which has been downloaded 5m times, its Instagram account, which has 132,000 followers, its YouTube, with nearly 25m views, or its bestselling The Complete Guide to Freebirth, a video course co-created by Saldaya with fellow ex-doula Yolande Norris-Clark, available for download from FBS’s slick website. Analysis of FBS’s financial records by Stacey Ferris, a forensic accountant and academic at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, suggests it has generated revenues exceeding $13m since 2018.
... For $299, mothers can join FBS’s paid-for, private online community, the Lighthouse. To prepare for freebirth, women purchase The Complete Guide to Freebirth, for $399. Reading all that material, women become brainwashed into thinking that freebirth is the safest way to deliver their babies. The consequences are predictable, when there is no medical support on hand and things go sideways, you end up with dead babies or disabled children for no effing reason other than to make some fuckwit a lot of money. But sure, free speech and all that. This touches on a lot of my concerns regarding 'free speech' - Specifically, 'free speech' within the context of two important factors : 1) People correctly don't trust (the) government and/or authority. This opening of reasonable doubt can be, and is, exploited by conspiracy hawkers as an in to gain their trust. 2) This 'speech' can be, and is done for profit though abuse of social media algorithms. Either monetization directly on the platforms via ad revenue, or by a connected pipeline of products (I.e. 'supplement' products that claim to detox microplastics or boost your sperm count or whatever). The speech is not done for the idea it presents, but the profit it brings. Truth is unimportant, and truth is not popular because truth is boring. I have no issue with people defaulting to a mistrust of authority. In fact, I think that's probably good. I also have no issue with someone excercising their right to claim the earth is flat or that aliens invaded egypt 4,000 years ago, or that (insert government figure here) is actually a lizardperson. Where I take issue is the use of this 'free speech' to exploit stupid people for financial gain, without regard for the health and wellbeing of the stupid people, and without concern for the accuracy of what's being said. It's not important if anyone is actually a lizardperson, it's important that you get the eyes of people who believe lizardpeople are real, because odds are they'll take you at your word that your product works, because after all you agree with them that so-and-so is a lizard. Like dyhb mentioned, the clear answer to this is civil suits and other legal action, I just wonder if that's sufficient. Cases like InfoWars / Alex Jones stand as examples - This dude spent years building an empire on misinformation and profiting off of it. Sure, eventually he got taken down by one of his lies, but how many people did he hurt along the way? I don't think 'Silence Alex Jones' was ever the answer, but I do wish there was a way to force him to profit off the truth of his statements and not the conteoversy / conspiracy of them. I guess for me the bigger problem there is a whole slew of misinformation is too scattershot and generalised to sue for. I mean yeah if someone libels me I can sue (assuming I have the means). How does one collectively sue for say, rabble rousing about whole groups of people? Muslims and Jews are pretty common targets nowadays for example. I’m certainly no Alex Jones fan, I’m unsure how ‘damaging’ his content is in the wider context. Not because it isn’t utter bullshit, more in terms of is he too ‘out there’ to actually draw sufficient numbers in. I feel the real problematic stuff in terms of detrimental effects is way less obviously extreme nonsense, which I guess makes it even harder again to tackle. I mean fuck Alex Jones, but there seems plenty worse out there to me sensibilities that haven’t faced nearly the same censure
Fair enough - I don't have particular evidence that his claims were quantifiably damaging (Outside, of course, of the one/ones he was sued for). For my purposes, he mostly stands as a clear example of 'selling misinformation' as a profitable affair.
@baal stuff
Keep swinging your sword in your fantasyland, bro. It's amusing to watch you miss.
|
On March 27 2026 18:15 baal wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2026 13:32 Razyda wrote:
@baal I dont think you understand your situation.
You arguing with people who will tell you that Trump ban is fine because it is private platform, then complain that Musk banned someone from his platform. You arguing with people who believe that speech which lead to harm should be banned but are first to call others nazis, racists, child rapists, fascists.
You essentially arguing with people who somehow believe that if you tell somebody to " go f...k yourself" and then somebody rip of their d...k trying to show it up his a....s, the problem is your speech, but when they say "do x next" it is x who is the problem.
The reason I came back to tl.net was because BlackJack send me a PM asking me to come post in the politics thread but it didn't take long before I realized it was too late, Constantinople had fallen, but alas here I am, last man standing swinging my sword against the horde of reddit-brained barbarians until the ban-hammer inevitably gets me.
This is the most Reddit-coded post in this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71tODUK2amL._AC_SL1500_.jpg)
