2025 RationalWiki 'Oregon Plan' Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!
Donations so far: $8765.50Goal: $10000

RationalWiki:Saloon bar

From RationalWiki
(Redirected from Saloon bar)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Saloon bar
WIGO Bar colour.png

Welcome, BoN
This is a place for general chit-chat about virtually anything that doesn't fit anywhere else.
Icon beer yellow.gif For previous conversations, see the automagic barchives.Icon beer yellow.gif

What is going on?

(talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic)

[hide]Pointless poll

It's the end of the world as we know it. Do you feel fine?

Yes

65

Vote

No

174

Vote

My enemy is...

Pigeons

6

Vote

Geese

66

Vote

Ducks

2

Vote

Corvids

12

Vote

Gulls

28

Vote

Starlings

4

Vote

Owls

3

Vote

Parakeets

3

Vote

Hawks

4

Vote

Cliff Racers

32

Vote

Zubat

32

Vote

Has KarmaPolice been watching The Birds?

57

Vote

To do list

Someone to feel sorry for

The US President elected November 2028/succeeding Trump who has to renegotiate so much with all the other states who have been alienated and/or have negotiated alliances where the US is treated as a marginal actor. Anna Livia (talk) 13:02, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

"People voted for this shit" and that's the problem: I would think that one cannot assume that the United States is the "leader of the free world" anymore. At least, as long as there is a very large audience for the current tribalism-oriented, isolationist, anti-intellectual, and authoritarian Trumpism movement. Pax Americana as a result may indeed very well be dead, or at least neutered, unless the politics here changes significantly.
(Even without Trump, "the GOP propaganda machine" still exists, so I am not hopeful that this element will disappear completely anytime soon personally. Maybe Trump will fuck things up so badly that such will be neutered though. We'll see.) BobJohnson (talk) 15:08, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Trump got the vote of about 30% of the total voting population. Why is the majority so silent? Janosabel (talk) 14:39, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
See ScepticWombat's post at the end. Lots of propaganda floating around these days. Plus, a lot of people just don't care.
But also see the people who *are* protesting. SwasticarsTesla is seeing significant protests. There's been several rallies around Mahmoud Khalil. Angry people have forced GOP representatives to flee town halls, even in rural areas.
Part of the issue is that Democrat leadership is corporatist and impotent. So there's no really big organized way to oppose Trump. But people are angry about that too. The 2026 primaries should be... interesting... to see if this anger translates into anything. (There's been some comparisons of the situation with the conditions that led to the Tea Party movement, but it's hard to know what will happen here since, unlike the Tea Party, the corporate astroturfing probably will be minimal.) BobJohnson (talk) 15:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
For what it's worth I noticed a decently sized protest in my town of like 10,000 out in the boonies of New England last weekend. No more than 50 people from what I saw, but it's something. Mostly older people too, which I thought was suprising. Gabaghoul 🥩 18:06, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
30,000 turned out for a Bernie Sanders / AOC anti-oligarchy rally in Denver yesterday. I mention this because things like this typically aren't being reported too much, in favor of... other things. (The New York Times for instance is currently spending their non-Trump oxygen covering modern Unabomber fans for some reason. Why?) BobJohnson (talk) 18:54, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
I don't think the US's political ties with Canada or Europe can be renegotiated. An enormous amount of trust has been lost and will not easily be regained. I have never seen so much anti-American sentiment in my life.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 16:13, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
A benefit for Canada is that, from what I can tell, I think Trump is doing a great job neutering the previously creeping "Trumpism" in Canadian conservatives. Trumpy Canadian stuff like Rebel News still exists, but that site seems awfully out of step, even laughable. The Canadian conservatives making headlines these days are ones like Doug Ford who are punching back at Trump, not kissing his ass.
(Not sure if there's a similar effect in Europe or not. It would make sense if there was.)
(Side note: Isn't it weird that "killing Pax Americana" is "making America great again"? It's like Trump and MAGA never knew what America really was.) BobJohnson (talk) 16:30, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Another free and fair US election seems a bit optimistic at this point IMO. And Trumpism becoming dead in Canada is maybe occurring in the Eastern provinces, but I assure you that in the prairies, particularly Alberta and Saskatchewan, frothing at the mouth MAGA supporters are still present; the incredibly muted tariff responses of Danielle Smith and Scott Moe are, when compared to other provinces, revealing I'd say. Impiricism (talk) 16:43, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
The last national free and fair election would have predated Citizens United v. FEC (2010) giving corporate citizenship, and Shelby County v. Holder (2013) that began the neutering of the Voting Rights Act (1965). It would have excluded the 1968 and 1972 elections in which Nixon committed felonies in each one to get elected and the 1980 election in which Reagan committed a felony to get elected. That leaves the elections of 1976 (Carter), 1984 (double Reagan), 1988 (greater Bush), 1992 (Clinton), 1996 (double Clinton), 2000 (lesser Bush), 2004 (double dubya), and 2008 (Obama) as arguably free and fair (or more accurately freest and fairest). Bongolian (talk) 17:32, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
I'm not able to rule out a third Trump term. I think he'll push for it hard at some point. --Ozzyboo (talk) 17:58, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Does Trump play chess? Anna Livia (talk) 18:57, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, the GOP has been playing the Viktor Orban playbook for several years now. By this I mean: elections still happen in Hungary, and they aren't manipulated... overtly. However, many subtle changes have occurred in Hungary's landscape -- such as making media, education, courts, and other institutions Orban mouthpieces, and extensive gerrymandering. The elections in Hungary are still "free" in a "technically correct" sense, but strongly gamed.
The GOP already has implemented much of this playbook. Donald Trump was elected on a wave of propaganda; a lot of American media, ranging from Fox News to Elon Musk's Twitter, exists in an alternate universe where the Democrats can do nothing right and are to blame for everything on the planet; extensive gerrymandering does occur (on both sides in this case, though). I don't think the US is quite fully Orbanized due to the extensive federalism and some independence in the courts still (despite there clearly being GOP suck-up judges as well). But US elections certainly are quite gamed at this point.
How much of the GOP side of the gaming will fall apart once the Dear Leader Trump expires, of course, is an open question, since much seems to rely on his appeal to celebrity "charisma". BobJohnson (talk) 18:03, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
That might not happen for a while. While Trump is a walking epitome of an unhealthy diet and lifestyle, that's not to mention his age and apparent cognitive degeneration, he also has access to some of the best healthcare on the entire fucking planet. Antares (talk) 20:36, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Unlike some 'ordinary Americans'.
What will happen as the tariffs and other factors start having serious impacts on 'MAGAists and ordinary working people are affected? Anna Livia (talk) 13:56, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
I’m not optimistic about a direct blowback against Trump from his supporters, unfortunately. I think the calamities and damage caused by Trump and his toadies are far more likely to result in a lot of deflection among his supporters who will blame anyone but Trump, such as Congress critters, “Washington” (but not Trump), “internationalists”, “foreigners” “bad rich people” (again not Trump) etc.
I just saw some clips of West Virginians who were among those hard hit by the recent floods and none were quick to blame Trump or Musk, or they complained about their(!) federal aid being cut, rather than all the supposed federal “waste”. Oh, and they generally clamoured for more FEMA funding and aid, which is quite hilarious, considering they were all old enough to potentially remember all of the “FEMA camps” conspiracy brouhaha.
They also kept insisting that “Washington” and the federal government had never done anything for West Virginia, showing zero awareness of the massive federal transfers the state has received for decades. Instead, everything was about self reliance within the local community.
It’s worth remembering that not only were some of the interviewees self proclaimed Trump voters, but that he won West Virginia by a landslide (almost 70% of the vote), that the state is generally solidly Republican (their one former “Democratic” senator was the infamous Joe Manchin), and that it’s thus not a bad proxy for the reactions of Trump supporters in a crisis.
While I can easily see why these West Virginians feel left behind, the seemingly complete lack of knowledge and/or awareness that this does not mean that their state isn’t already heavily reliant on federal transfers is probably indicative of the kind of selective reactions we’re likely to see to the fallout from Trump’s chaotic and destructive actions from his supporters. I think it’s basically that they never considered the possibility that it would also be their(!) faces that Trump’s leopards would eat. ScepticWombat (talk) 08:48, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

RationalWiki got sued again (twice)

The RationalMedia Foundation has just been hit with TWO lawsuits.

Trent tmtoulouse shared this news in the Board of Trustees chatroom on the official RationalWiki Discord server, and immediately announced that he is completely done with RationalWiki:

Since I am no longer involved in raising or spending money, or making any operational descisions, I feel like I have abdocated that role a long time ago and have essentially resigned my position. I am happy to offer personal opinion if asked. If any of hte suits move forward with me listed as a defendant I intend to file an affidative stating my resignation. As such I can not take action to precure a lawyer or anything for the foundation. —Tmtoulouse

DuceMoosolini read this and immediately resigned from the Board.

There is nobody at the wheel. Unless somebody steps up and starts doing some real heavy lifting when it comes to reincorporating in Oregon (a state with good anti-SLAPP laws that would specifically protect us from lawsuits like this), these lawsuits are, potentially, the death of the Foundation. Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 01:39, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

What's funny about the Smith lawsuit (aside from the fact that it is pretty much a joke) is if there are any Oliver Smith nuggets online, they are probably actually *on* Rationalwiki... as, despite his personal ban, the small size of this Wiki (plus the on-topic nature) means that more of his junk is on here. Wikipedia has more protection against "disruptive sock" type stuff and my impression is his sock shit did not go far there. If Smith plays a part in somehow KOing Rationalwiki, way to go on the self-own! Hell, I'm of the mood that a "mass delete" of racialism articles might be a good protection against the long-running brouhaha now that such has reached lawsuit levels. Hope that's what Smith wanted!
The other thing though is the Smith lawsuit has the audacity to complain that being blocked from a service by a moderator is defamation. This not only should be easy to dismiss on Section 230 grounds, but if Rationalwiki is forced to "lets it go", it possibly sets a bad precedent for any Internet service with voluntary moderation service. Add in the fact that Smith is a habitual court abuser (Substack recently swatted a Smith lawsuit away with a motion to dismiss) and you'd think the actual lawyering required to dismiss this would be pretty easy, and maybe one can get some help. Substack has some Kik messenger folks to help out. We don't . BobJohnson (talk) 03:22, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
@Stabby the Misanthrope If the RMF dies, will RW die too? GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 11:19, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
I would take this threat seriously. If the RMF loses its domain, somebody could still copy and paste the content elsewhere, but we'd no longer have the same PageRank. Also, legal reports to Google could further nuke it at that point. We should probably do some minimal course correction, but also signal that we do mean and will abide by it in the future. This could help us in court. KaDaShOvA (talk) 11:31, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
I suggest [unless legally impossible] that RW raids it's reserves and moves to Oregon now, with the hope/expectation we'll raise the final ~$3k in the interim. What's more, fucking employ someone to do the 'heavy lifting' if we can't find anyone to do it. A nest egg is worthless to a dead org. KarmaPolice (talk) 11:39, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
That's kinda beside the point, though. Speaking as a law student, both lawsuits will have to be defended wherever your state of incorporation was at the time of the purported offense. Where was your domain registered? Bookability (talk) 12:05, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
I know that. The point is that to avoid any more hits on RW. Anyway, Oliver is defending themselves from the UK and isn't a lawyer so I actually suspect RW could fight that one if we could find somebody to merely turn up to the courtroom. KarmaPolice (talk) 12:29, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Is there a way to download the entirety of RationalWiki's articles for offline viewing? Assuming servers do get shutoff. Impiricism (talk) 12:39, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Rationalwiki is available on Kiwix for download (like other Wikis), but it has not been updated since March 2021. BobJohnson (talk) 13:36, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
This is a great website but has proven to be unsafe in a few areas; until a month ago there wasn't even any rule in place to block users from off-site harassment. There should be a proper legal team like Wikipedia and a phone number. The Foundation has had months to move but nothing was done, they are still in New Mexico. There should be a solid board of trustees (2 have resigned in the last 48 hours). Duce is a good editor it's sad to see he resigned.
I have been threatened with legal action from one of the above plaintiffs in the last 24 hours telling me he is going to reveal my identity and expose me if I do not stop editing here. I made the mistake of giving him some information about myself. I lecture at universities on veganism so I do not want my identity leaked because dozens of carnivore diet loons will come after me. I have decided to resign from editing RationalWiki. Other Wikis are safer to edit. There isn't even a check-user here nor a ban list or sock-puppet investigation list and not enough senior admins. If there was a check-user we could have created a sock-puppet investigation for Smith and listed his old accounts. He has complained that trustees have blocked accounts under his real name incorrectly. I am not sure why users were using his real life name. Perhaps a policy should have been in place where real names cannot be used like at Wikipedia per the OUTING rule. I have spent many hours creating detailed articles on this website debunking pseudoscience. I couldn't care less about "HBD" researchers. If RationalWiki votes and wants to delete all those articles just remove them, I would support BobJohnson on that. Oldman4 (talk) 13:46, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
This is America; when it comes to "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press", money rules above all. Wikipedia has enough income to have a team of 6 figure lawyers to swat aside bullshit suits. We don't.
I personally have long been in favor of "Checkuser" (e.g. IP logging); I am also in favor, in light of the current web, of Wikipedia-like rules on editing from VPNs. There is an "old guard" who used to edit this Wiki in the more wild west days of the Internet; they don't edit much at all now, but will mysteriously pop up anytime discussions about these rules come up, and have successfully swatted those rules away so far. Conservapedia level trolls are not my concern here; they are nothing compared to the trolls and gaming in the current environment. So much of the old guard is IMHO a bunch of naive fucks living in the past.
From what I can tell, Jonathan Anomaly (my guess of who said harasser is) seems to have recently been trying to scrub any perceived "right wing" associations in order to shine up his eugenic, Silicon Valley-appeal "superbaby" startups, and the Rationalwiki article's high Google rank (and the fact that the org is in no state to defend itself) probably irks. I think the lawsuit is incorrect from the start (point 39 is wrong, they fucking spelled pseudoscience as "pseuydoscience" in point 41 showing the slop; point 47 is wrong, Anomaly *is* a public figure by his published books alone; point 51 is wrong, the article says that Anomaly published in the antisemitic Unz Review, not that Anomaly was an antisemite itself; etc.) The lawsuit seems like it tries to quibble with "technical correct", which any competent lawyer should be able to tear apart. But you need money for "competent lawyer".
Anomaly got a nice Hope not Hate investigation into him, which actually led to articles in The Guardian and even the fucking Daily Mail; from what I can tell, significant chunks of the RW articles came from that. This is not one of the "shit HBD" articles, and given that parts of Silicon Valley (particularly the Elon Musk side of the fence) seem to want to do a speedrun of 1920s eugenics intellectual climate (sigh), it's more relevant than a lot of the Smith stuff. But this is America, money rules above all, and shit like this is why our RSF press freedom index is down in the dumps, aligned next to Gabon and Belize instead of Norway and the Netherlands. Fortunately it will be a lot tougher for him to go after the UK orgs (assuming the reporting is solid, which it seems to be); for a start, the UK laws don't like that eugenics IVF shit up there to begin with. BobJohnson (talk) 14:33, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Anomaly is featured in the weirdly neutral Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on Eugenics Ioe bidome (talk) 03:34, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
As for the offline download, could a board member not get a XML dump from Special:Statistics or Special:Export? Phantasmagoria (talk) 18:53, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
There was a 2023 dump of RW on the Internet Archive,[1] though one should be very cautious about using Torrent downloads due to the risk of embedded malware from Torrent servers.[2] Bongolian (talk) 20:17, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Aside from cash donations and New Mexico based legal aid, what concrete actions would be helpful and what is the best private way to communicate with the board about them? Polydamas (talk) 00:47, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Deleting HBD/racialism articles

The HBD and racialism articles are the primary reason why Rational Wiki is worthwhile.

The Anomaly lawsuit makes clear that publicizing facts about Anomaly's history of promoting race pseudoscience has impacted his career and that's a good thing.

I think it's very likely that Kirkegaard is assisting Anomaly, since Anomaly appears to be a member in good standing of the Kirkegaard network via Aporia. Kirkegaard has plenty of money thanks to plutocrat racists. And the timing of the Anomaly lawsuit is no doubt exactly because RMF is publicly fundraising to move to a less SLAPP-happy state.

I'm no lawyer, but it looks pretty clear that Anomaly's lawsuit is pure SLAPP. And in addition to deserving to lose the lawsuit, Anomaly deserves - and likely will get - a good dose of Streisand effect in response to his assault on the First Amendment. Pinkerite (talk) 22:56, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

The First Amendment does not apply to private litigation. Zatoichi (talk) 02:23, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
SLAPP suits in principle are an assault on the First Amendment. Pinkerite (talk) 14:58, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Oliver Smith

I have defended Smith in the past at Rational Wiki, because he has been a target of attacks by the race pseudoscience mob, and once gave me a heads-up when I was being attacked on Twitter by Razib Khan and Emil Kirkegaard and others in tandem.

A month ago Smith mentioned to me via email that he wanted to sue RMF and I told him not to, and I thought I had convinced him. So I was surprised when some troll spammed my RW page with the info of the Smith lawsuit. I agree with the assessment that Smith's lawsuit is garbage. He has apparently decided to make RMF his scapegoat since he can't identify the people who are harassing him by sending nasty snailmail to him and his neighbors. I have no doubt Kirkegaard is behind the harassment, since Kirkegaard has a history of harassing Smith and has financial motivation.

Yet ironically, and stupidly, Smith's lawsuit is aiding and abetting Kirkegaard and friends by causing more stress on RMF. So going forward I will not be defending Oliver Smith. Pinkerite (talk) 23:02, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

I told you he was an arsehole. Spud (talk) 14:01, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Duce is back (and Board response)

I have rescinded my resignation from the Board due to its near-complete inactivity since the two lawsuits were announced. I am currently in the process of lighting a fire under everyone's asses so we can organize a response. The Board owes it to the community to at least put up a fight. I am making this announcement publicly for two reasons. First, so the community can hold the Board accountable to this promise of action. Second, because myself or other Board members might ask members of this community for assistance or advice. This is RationalWiki's darkest hour, but I believe that if we all come together, this will be followed by our finest moments. Pizza SLICE.gifDuceMoosoliniYour friendly RW dictator moderator 14:52, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Bravo! Pinkerite (talk) 15:26, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
I have posted the first in a series about Anomaly on Pinkerite. Pinkerite (talk) 15:31, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
Thank you, DuceMoosolini! Let's support our board in this fight. Bongolian (talk) 16:26, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
Make that thrice for lawsuits See Talk:Russell T. Warne‎‎ Warne v. Rationalwiki Foundation, Inc. (1:25-cv-00274) https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69742296/warne-v-rationalwiki-foundation-inc/. Lavalizard101 (talk) 13:46, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Discussing this matter publicly

Maybe the people responsible for this internet site should not discuss something like this on a publicly available forum? It will only encourage individuals compromised by the site's content to sue too. New world (talk) 15:17, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

These lawsuits are spurious, get free legal counsel and tell them you are looking for Anti-SLAPP and see where they send you. If it becomes a money game, that's one thing, but I bet there's a lawyer who wants an easy anti-slapp win on the cheap. Torrent (talk) 03:35, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
There are now 4 lawsuits https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69772253/te-nijenhuis-v-rationalwiki-foundation-inc/ . What does this mean for the RationalWiki Foundation? How is the the Foundation going to put a legal defence up for all these lawsuits? I see that the Foundation is nowhere near moving to Oregon because the fundraiser is not even over. What does the Foundation plan on doing if there is a 6th or 7th lawsuit? 134.122.101.50 (talk) 16:49, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
@ApooftGnegiol; @Bongolian; @DuceMoosolini; @Flandres; @KarmaPolice; @Spud: Some person should quickly remove this section and hide it from both common lurking users and administrators. New world (talk) 17:34, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
Lawsuits on the weekly and no damage control is being done. 2600:387:15:3C11:0:0:0:5 (talk) 19:02, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
All from the same law firm. It makes me wonder if this lawyer is contacting the subjects of every negative BLP article we have here to make a quick buck by suing on their behalf. 2600:387:15:3C11:0:0:0:5 (talk) 19:06, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
Jan te Nijenhuis is best friends with Heiner Rindermann, I predict he will be the next to file. 216.238.66.182 (talk) 02:03, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
Oh, how surprising, a German now. It's almost as if all this can be traced all the way back to Mengele if you look at the makind Quarterly. They're all just Nazis. It's literally that simple and we should no longer be afraid to say it. 71.125.40.33 (talk) 02:45, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Since we're talking about lawsuits

Discussion moved to RMF page Here lies the organization that was once ran by college students for its entire lifespan. HebrewScholar (talk)

Trump Derangement

In the news. Anna Livia (talk) 21:26, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

So... when do the (exceptionally large, nation-paralyzing) mass protests begin, with or without violent resistance to the fascist regime? Is it when Trump's administration bans the "sick, evil, and dangerous" Democratic Party or arrests prominent members (midterms mayhap... prolly 2028 election though I would think)? Or- .... oh... there won't be anything like that? Most Americans still don't think it'll get that far? ... that's depressing. Life is depressing. I'm depressed :( Impiricism (talk) 22:28, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
I'm guessing the summer. Antares (talk) 00:00, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
"Dog and pony show" bills like this mean nothing, they are just designed for talking points on the political circus. It won't even make Governor Tim Walz's desk.
At any rate, these days, "woke derangement syndrome" is far worse. Always has been. Lyndon Johnson called it a long time ago; racists are willing to empty their pockets if some charlatan comes along and promises to hurt "the right people". (Never tends to work out that way, though, does it?) BobJohnson (talk) 01:38, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
Taking notes from the Soviets, I guess. ミ★ LunaAHHHHH 23:44, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
So, one, it's performative nonsense, two nobody will ever get an official diagnosis, and three, if they did a person classified with a real mental illness would be protected by a lot more than 'DEI' removal efforts would strip, which goes to show these legislators have no fucking clue what they are doing. They are just giddy about their perceived zeitgeist, they are using their elected positions of actual power to be smug clowns. It's not the bill people should be worried about, because no doctor will ever diagnose you with Trump Derangement, you are safe from that nonsense. It's that these people think this is worth their time as elected officials. If it DOESN'T make Waltz' desk/platform as exactly a dog and pony show, then he is failing at explaining why modern Republican governance is wasteful and antithetical to good governance. Call it out for everyone's sake. Torrent (talk) 05:01, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
Sluggish schizophrenia
'How can a sane person oppose a system which is so determined to help the people and country?' Yuri Andropov to Oleg Kalugin, c1977.
KarmaPolice (talk) 12:18, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
To Impiricism's point, though... there *are* protests going on. Nation-paralyzing? No. But they are there.
Much of the focus that I see recently is on Elon Musk's Tesla. It's enough to get Donnie's little fee-fees hurt and casually throw around "domestic terrorist" in his usual whiny way.
Remember, these protests are not risk free. Musk has his army of brownshit shitposters willing to do the usual doxxing run-around to any organizers the mob notices. There's more than a touch of "mafia state" in Trump's America (albeit a mafia composed of basement dwellers...)
Still, protests are happening, and from what I see, there is some impact. It is pretty clear that some of Tesla's 40% stock price decline YTD is due to Musk's DOGE shit, Hitler sympathies, and obsession with the "anti-woke". Such is killing Tesla's brand and Tesla sales. So all this is not nothing. BobJohnson (talk) 12:48, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
(I'll also add in the many recent stories of Republican politicians angrily being confronted by their constituents. Nation paralyzing, no, but it's enough where GOP leadership has instructed the politicians to bravely run, run away! from talking to those those pesky voters. Mind you, a lot of folks still like the Trump... the Orange One cult has a hold on so many. But a lot do seem to be pissed off. And it's only March.) BobJohnson (talk) 12:57, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
There is a distinct lack of coverage; to the point I know people in my [foreign] circle who think nobody is actually opposing Trump's shittiness. However, my circle has noticed a) the Tesla boycott and b) Vance keep on being booed in public. So those need to be strengthened/widened. But I think the main cramp right now is that the Democrats still seem to not get it into their fucking thick skulls that 'the Second American Revolution' is being done right now and if you don't actively oppose it [including mobilising the people] those fucking MAGA tanks will run over your spines sooner or later. So there's talks about who will be the '28 Pres pick? Who fucking cares? At this rate, that election will resemble the one Putin had last year! KarmaPolice (talk) 14:06, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
Keep an eye on the Democrats that *are* putting a good effort in, folks like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and whatnot. The "spineless middle" of the party, the Chuck Schumers of the world, the "leadership", really looks fucking weak right now.
I think the Democrat "leadership", blinded by being part of the donor class, are trying to play up to some imagined Third Way "middle ground" that really doesn't exist now. Or, rather, if it exists, is a small little slice of life akin to the "Never Trumper" Republicans. This is no longer 1995. It shouldn't be about pealing off Republican voters with watered down corporate conservatism. It should be all about appealing to the "double party haters", the apathetic third, those who (rightly) believe that American politics is all about enriching the donor class above all. I mean, hell, the working class seems to like Sanders despite the term "Democrat" being supposedly toxic to them; if the Democrats want to improve their standing, why not look for hints here instead of this mushy Third Way rehash?
Now, the two parties obviously are quite different even though they are both corporatist (and some people are getting a lesson about that these days :p ). But the Democrats won't win too many more votes being the party of the "slightly kinder and gentler oligarch" sect. A few of their politicians know this; a lot don't. BobJohnson (talk) 14:43, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
Speaking purely personally, I think it's got to the stage where you don't need to hugely talk about what you would 'like to see done', simply to stop the New Order. The illegality, the mindless hacking apart of the state, the neutered media, the ever-rising feelings that to speak out is risky, that your freedoms are under direct, organised assault, the personality cult, utter politicisation of the civil service etc. That it is Happening Here now and this might be the last chance to stop it in a manner which doesn't involve a full-blown actual war. It's actually got to the point I don't think it's hyperbole to talk about, say working out how to appeal to the rank/file of the military to defy orders to deploy against the American people.
And history shows us that while 'people power' can work, said people power needs leaders to rally it, to grant visibility to it and to sell 'project liberation' to the wider public. I'd actually suggest thinking of founding some kind of 'Moral Majority' umbrella org which can unify all the disparate groups into a very simple manifesto to oppose Project 2025 and their dreams of a Putinist Randmaid's Tale. And to accept that yes, there will be risks, but that cannot be helped. KarmaPolice (talk) 14:58, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
Can I mention Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless (Internet Archive (also worthy of support) version here? Anna Livia (talk) 19:24, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
The U.S. has always been ruled by businesses and by money to some extent; from its earliest day you needed to own land in order to vote and that requirement excluded a significant portion of the population. Your movement won't get very far unless you can convince some business leaders that their interests align with yours. Part of the reason why Regean and his team were so successful was because they were able to unite business interests (particularly in finance and energy) and religious leaders like Falwell against common enemies; the internal enemy of the secular welfare state and the external enemy of the Soviets.
The current administration seems to be doing a lot to piss off every industry that isn't tech or finance (not just workers, but even the bosses in the form of hurting their bottom lines through things like tariffs on materials and deporting their employees), so now seems like a good time for progressives and moderates to court businessmen and workers who have been hurt by the Republicans' shenanigans. A Russia-style oligarchy where plutocrats and the well-connected get to ignore laws they don't like and crush everyone else is bad both for people who hate capitalism and for capitalists who aren't part of the oligarchy. Gabaghoul 🥩 17:11, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
There actually have been a couple of "correction" periods to excessive capitalism / business / "big money" rule in American history. Broadly speaking, these would be:
  • The Progressive Era (1890-1920) -- This essentially was a correction to the widespread political corruption and monopoly powers in the Gilded Age, and probably the most significant period in American history where "the biz got spanked a bit".
  • The New Deal (1933-1939) -- sure, the Roaring Twenties was fun, but there was also a lot of idiocy, resulting in the Great Depression. While I don't think businesses got quite as spanked by FDR during this period (compared to the progressive era with its trust busters), businesses hated FDR, to the point where the fascist Business Plot dictator takeover dream was a thing.
The issue here with the "follow the business money" deal is that I think this is precisely what the Third Way mush types are doing. Any Big Business types who are not Republican aligned are still not going to want to rock the boat too much. And for the moment, these types pay the DNC bills (thanks, Citizens United). Yet, a lot of the root cause behind Trumpism and all the other populist right movements is the decline of the middle class, hollowed out by globalization (the source of all the "immigrants" that the rubes detest), automation, and the supply side economics type policies of Ronald Reagan onward. For the moment, the propaganda is working to convince millions that a billionaire New Yorker is actually looking out for their interest because he "talks tough". It's a ruse, of course, but I don't think you'll be able to break that ruse with corporatist Third Way shit. BobJohnson (talk) 17:52, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
'Follow the money' leads almost immediately to 'we need to accept the New Order' conclusions and in this case, doing what the MAGA-King demands. History notes how few big capitalists actually opposed the building of the Third Reich in the first three years while we can reel off a ton of scientists, creatives, journalists and more ordinary folks who either resisted or fled [military officers also suffered this weakness of lack of resistance]. The answer to this is simple; as Orwell glibly noted then; 'that unless [a designated Other personally] the capitalist has very little to fear from fascism'. History also tells us that there will be 'rich pickings' for capitalists who do accept the New Order; from taking over former-Other businesses cheap to getting govt contracts or other handouts.
We also need to note that even if the American economy goes kuput the major capitalists will almost without fail become richer because their stranglehold over the productive assets of the nation will rise, as well as booking the ever-increasing debt held by the American peons as 'assets' for their balance sheets [an act made easier with DOGE gutting the SEC]. It is also fairly likely that over time the American finance houses shall learn the New Order's tune, making it even easier for the 'loyal' capitalists to get free money to prop up their empires while those still resisting find themselves gutted for parts.
So as a TL:DR; 'don't fucking rely on the forces of capitalism to save American democracy'. KarmaPolice (talk) 18:12, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
Good luck overthrowing the capitalists when they control the guys who make most of the guns, own and operate most of the communications infrastructure, and have enough cash to pay off the judges. When you run into people who can't be reasoned with on your path to revolution, you'd better have some powerful friends to convince those people to change their tune - politely or otherwise. Gabaghoul 🥩 20:56, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
On the plus side, most of the capitalist class isn't hugely in favour of the MAGA-King either, so 'overthrowing capitalists' is not automatically required to 'stop the MAGA-project'. What's more, in this case it's not 'making a revolution' but actively stopping the MAGA one. Ultimately, most are fairly flaccid outside their own narrow interests and as such will bend and flex to whoever they think is winning. KarmaPolice (talk) 21:24, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

I think that the American founders and authors of the constitution and subsequent amendments, designed a system meant to resist authoritarian movements like the one we currently face. Will it hold against the intemperate, wrathful stupidity that seems to have overtaken the Republican Party? Perhaps. We may yet see it as an unpleasant phase of American democracy, one that passes as all others have so far passed. There are no guarantees in life. It is, I think, impressive that the Constitution has survived and even caused our society to develop in ways that have, in the past, advanced justice and social welfare. But, there is no "right side of history."
The desire of Republicans to designate ideological opposition to Trumpism as mental illness is not a symptom of fascism, but of modern authoritarianism. During Mussolini's fascist regime in Italy (1922-1943), psychiatric hospitals were used to punish those persons who did not conform to the new regime, including political enemies. The Nazis decided to eliminate all the mentally ill in general and had no compunction about classing dissidents as such. In the Soviet Union, psychiatric hospitals were often used by the authorities as prisons, in order to isolate political prisoners and discredit their ideologies. And recently, the CCP has been known to incarcerate dissidents in mental hospitals.Zatoichi (talk) 16:24, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Small (and a bit icky) schadenfreude-y update

One of the five Minnesota Republican Senators who sponsored the "Trump Derangement Syndrome" dog and pony show bill, Justin Eichorn (age 40, married with 4 kids), has reportedly been arrested for attempting to solicit sex from what he thought was a 16-year old girl. *cough* BobJohnson (talk) 19:20, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Trump derangement part 2

From my 'usual source of weird news' (having trained the algorithms somewhat) - his chess involvement and [3] (James VI-and-I's quote 'The state of monarchy is the supremest thing upon earth...' may be appropriate here) Anna Livia (talk) 19:34, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

There is also [4]. (There is also the comment 'We get the politicians we deserve - what have we done to deserve Trump?) Anna Livia (talk) 17:17, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

What went wrong with Elon Musk?

I never actually heard of the guy till he bought Twitter and changed its name. However, from research, it seems he was once idolized as a visionary with big plans for humanity, particularly creating a space colony as well as environmentally friendly energy. Then he suddenly become a laughingstock after he bought Twitter and rebranded it. Now he is one of the most hated figures currently engaging in inhumane activities and damaging the country. How did this guy go from visionary to laughingstock to villain? Tunafish (talk) 22:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

IMO He hasn't actually changed at all..... his activities stopped being seen as generally positive and useful..... and people said as much. And he didn't like that. When he as no clothes we can see him as he really is. Aloysius the Gaul (talk) 23:45, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Elon Musk is but the loudest voice of what's an issue with many of the Silicon Valley CEO/VC scene.
Take the insanity of the neoreactionary movement.
The media started occasionally noticing this movement around 2017 but the bulk of the RW article is well before that. It's still not exactly well known, though it got some attention in the 2024 election. It's the most naked "techno-fascist" movement in SV. While off its rocker, it's not *unrepresentative* of the scene.
So this shit is not *completely* new.
The thing here is, some US techies have a strong libertarian streak. (And when I say "libertarian", I mean that Ayn Rand-ish style worship of supposed "free markets").
Furthermore, some of these tech libertarians also have that Peter Thiel tendency, of course, of thinking that they are Completely Right with a capital C & R. To the point where pesky things like democracy, which give a bit of a voice to non-libertarians (which are most of us -- American libertarian philosophy is *not* popular), are inconveniences that should be eliminated. Because it is not the libertarians who are out of touch, it is the voters who are Wrong, of course.
It probably didn't help that libertarian tech bros heavily entangled with cryptocurrency, which became the currency of the lawless because what else is it good for?
It also probably didn't help that many of them made a ton of money during the Web 2.0 years. It's way too easy for the uber-rich to loose touch with the common man. Subsequently, a lot of prior facade of even attempting to care for the common man is gone. To give one example, I remember when tech bros were at one point musing about universal income. Haven't heard that angle much lately, eh?
In fact, instead, some of the SV scene has embraced the narrative of being The Smartest Person In The Room. (To the point where even things like eugenics have been brought back from the dead.) Classism, too, is rife. Being "anti-woke" is easy for a classist.
To some extent I also think that the "tech bros" got high on their own supply, too. A recurring topic in tech forums (which tend to, rightly, often be skeptical of tech) is "dark patterns" -- deceptive tactics online services or business do in order to manipulate user behavior. I suspect that for some (Musk, for sure, being a Twitter addict), "dark patterns" -- their very own social media algorithms -- helped fuel radicalization in itself. BobJohnson (talk) 00:24, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
I think what has happened more than anything else is out tech-bros have majorly merged with the older 80s Gordon Gecko 'greed is gorgeous' finance arseholes. KarmaPolice (talk) 13:05, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
As this video goes over, Elon has always been overhyped. It's just that back in the day, the only people calling him out on his shit were people knowledgeable about niche topics. Hyperloop for instance met with heavy criticism from traffic engineers. It's just that as Elon Dunning-Krugers his way into topics of interest to the general public, like gaming, more people are noticing that his super genius reputation is just hype. IOW, not much has changed about the man himself at all. Antares (talk) 13:11, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Supposedly anti-semitic imagery

Supposedly, this AI generated image (the one on the left) by LFI of far-right TV personality Cyril Hanouna (who's popular talk show, TPMP, was recently banned and who has expressed dreams to present himself in the presidential elections 2027) is « anti-semitic ». LFI changed the image and attributed the error to the AI (which is most likely what happened). The media have now started a massive campaign on this poster attacking it for « anti-semitic references » (the AI most likely did take into account Hanouna's Jewish Tunisian origins). LFI was convicted now, but for image rights, and not for anti-semitism. New world (talk) 19:29, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Note: I did not realise the first link was from a Turkish media close to the government of Erdogan. What is important here is more the image itself than what's written about it by this particular journal. New world (talk) 19:36, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
My French is not that good anymore and my politics are not that global, so por favor, help me with this one. The black and white photo is called antisemitic, but it's two pictures of this Cyril Hanouna with the same exact quote attributed to La France Insoumise. I don't know what any of the implications are, I have never heard of Cyril Hanouna. Did the politics change with the posters (affiche) or is it simply considered anti Semitic to criticize this person? Torrent (talk) 10:06, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
The media considers the way Hanouna was represented on the left image in my first link as anti-semitic, because it supposedly takes over anti-semitic themes from the 1930s (Hanouna's angry look). The image on the right was then made to replace the first image on the same poster (the subject of the poster is a demonstration against the far-right, of which Hanouna is a part of). Now, LFI has been convicted of breaking image rights because of the one on the right, what the media criticise though is the AI-generated left one. New world (talk) 17:12, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
If you want to see him in action, here is the grand Cyril Hanouna. Even with broken French you will get a general idea. New world (talk) 17:17, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

anonymous is back with dreadnought!

Anonymous is back with operation dreadnough. what are people's thoughts? Koafox (talk) 14:15, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

The only thing that I've heard about that is that when Twitter got PWNED two weeks ago. Anonymous claimed responsibility, but so did another hacking group.
In reality, the root cause of the pwnage (no matter who actually did the hack) seems to be some shitty infrastructure that was a very easy target. Oopsies happen, but they will happen even more when you fire nearly everyone and leave a shell of a social media service to smolder on. Something to think about while Elon Musk tries to use the "Twitter playbook" against the entire US government!
Regarding this "Anonymous" campaign, I have heard nothing since then so I have no idea what else to think at this point. BobJohnson (talk) 14:51, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Proposal: Trump/MAGA WIGO

Self explanatory; all the Trumpian stuff is flooding the WIGOs, so like the Covid one can we have a separate WIGO for it all? KarmaPolice (talk) 13:09, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Trumpery and Trumpetry are 'real words' if required. Anna Livia (talk) 13:52, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
I'm thinking about it. I'd certainly like to see more flags apart from the Stars and Stripes on the WIGO World page more often. But where, for example, would the Trump and Vance being a couple of arseholes to Zelenskyy story go? And what about the Trump and Canada, Greenland and Panama stuff? And Trump's hard on for Netanyahu and desire to get his mitts on Gaza? That and there isn't much RW-related stuff happening outside the US being reported by the mainstream media at the moment. Pity. I could do with a nice story, like an LGBTQ+ person being put on a banknote again.Spud (talk) 15:16, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
When it's a direct foreign angle, then yes it goes in the 'main' WIGO. The most obvious examples to go in the MAGA-WIGO would be stuff which is happening on the state level. KarmaPolice (talk) 16:12, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
WIGO in the MAGAsphere is a better name imo because MAGA and Trumpism are bigger than the man himself - even if he is its central figure. Semantics aside, I'm not against it. Gabaghoul 🥩 16:16, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Joining Whitehouse Facebook group.

Given the fact that Trump's highly professional appointees are using the Signal app to plan military action I figured that they might be planning them on Facebook next time and I want prior warning.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:43, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

I wouldn't be suprised if some White House staffers were discussing classified info over Discord as we speak. Gabaghoul 🥩 16:19, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
I think we can expect a lot of such cases in the future, given the kind of dingbats that Trump has crammed his administration to the brim with. This is what happens when you put incompetent toadies in charge who think the world of themselves, while openly displaying their attitude that rules don’t apply to them.
What’s interesting is to see whether anyone of the dingbats involved in this flagrant breach of national security will suffer any serious consequences or if the spineless GOP will once again back Trump’s chosen toadies to the hilt. If none of the “Signallers” suffer any serious punishment, then expect even more sloppy procedures in the future.
This is especially likely, given that this is about national security and anyone can probably imagine that if this is how such sensitive and potentially dangerous information is treated, then procedures and the treatment of confidential and sensitive government information is likely to be even more lackadaisical in other areas.
If this is any indication of how the Trump administration run things, then no wonder if Beijing and Moscow are able to easily anticipate Washington’s moves, due to being able to read along as the Trump cronies jabber amongst themselves on unsecured channels.
Then add the likelihood that the chaos in the bureaucracy and IT infrastructure generated by DOGE is a dream scenario for foreign cyber espionage and you’re looking at a massive risk of foreign intelligence (or cyber crime) penetration at multiple levels, which will make each of these leaks even harder to find, as the sheer number can make it difficult to see any patterns or use a process of elimination to home in on any one of them in particular. ScepticWombat (talk) 20:18, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
I'd disagree with one of those points. I personally think that due to the utter chaos/unpredictability of the Orange One's rule has made it harder for foreign actors to predict Washington's moves but for the likes of Putin and Xi, it's a lot more friendly Washington which makes it easier to deal with them on the whole. Take Taiwan, for example. I have argued here in the SB and elsewhere for a long time that due to the fact that island is a huge producer of advanced microchips it meant that despite whatever waffle and hedging Washington put in ultimately it simply couldn't allow the Chinese to take those plants anymore than they'd have allowed the Soviets to seize the Arabian oil fields in the 70s/80s because it simply wasn't in Washington's interest long-term to lose these positions [and Beijing knew this and made their plans accordingly]. However, what is utterly plain is that the Orange One and associated drek he's dredged up is that they don't give a flying fuck about 'American interests', only self-enrichment, personal power, ego-blowing and making America 'safe' for them personally so they can die of old age [though I think some are so fucking thick they don't realise being universally hated is possible/important].
In this new Gilded Age, anything and everything not directly tied to the previous can go fuck themselves. I mean, let's think of that Signal chat again; I could easily see the likes of bearded couch-fucker arguing that the Taiwanese were 'losers', that they were 'stealing American profits', being 'whiny' on wanting the US to defend them against China and it not being in the [very, very narrow definition of] 'American interests' to stop any invasion. Hell, I could even see him pushing the narrative that the Taiwanese people 'aren't real' and y'know, if the Orange Negus went to Beijing he could hang out with Pooh-Bear, drawing lines on a map of 'spheres of empire' a la Yalta to Make Everything Great. Let's not forget the very possible risk that by mid-'25 the USA is in quite severe political ferment due to the Negus's plans to become the Orange King; that in this situation Beijing et al might make moves because they believe there's a good chance American troops will be too busy stamping out internal dissent to aid any ally, even if they actually wanted to. KarmaPolice (talk) 00:40, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

What is being irrational?

If one believes that Humans are spiritual beings with a mission in the physical universe, is one suffering from pseudoscience?

Janosabel (talk) 17:29, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

The premise is irrational (belief without evidence). Q.E.D. Bongolian (talk) 22:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
I’d argue that being irrational is believing or acting in a way that undermines or prevents oneself from obtaining their interests. The relevance of logical reasoning, the appeal to evidence, and whatever else we may construe as “rational” is due to their relevance to maintaining a consistency in values and methods. If such was inconsistent, read: contradictory, then we couldn’t coherently pursue our own interests without violating our other interests. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 23:02, 25 March 2025 (UTC)