2036
Bill Burr calls on 'billionaires to be put down like rabid dogs' in podcast
(www.the-express.com)
this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2025
2036 points (98.8% liked)
politics
20329 readers
3336 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
My guy, if you keep posting like this you're going to get a visit from the secret service
I appreacite your concern, but is there something substantial to fear?
I have not crossed the line into credible death threats; this is first amendment protected speech. If I get a visit from the secret service I will consider it a win for having wasted their time.
And if Trump starts rounding up "online leftists agitators" or "antifa" or whatever to put in his concentration camps, I'll probably already be in the camps for a different reason.
lol of course .world deleted it. Cowards.
The og commented advocated killing children. We don't keep that up here. The real cowards are the folks than post comments like that to sound edgy online
Really hope they're posting from Venuzuela or Antarctica or orbit rn.
Did... You just endorse shooting a child to achieve your goal? Are the mods awake???
No gods no masters no mods because they're very sleepy rn
We kill children every day to achieve political goals. The problem is when you endorse it. What we have learned is that you first condemn it, then you do it any way, you achieve some goal and refuse to comment or spin it so it's actual the other parties fault. This way there is no issue.
Not to get all Jordan Peterson on you but who is "we"? What "political goals"? I have no idea what you're saying
is it not parody?
Heroes do not murder children.
I consider the Soviets and Americans who defeated the Nazis to be heroes, and they murdered a whole heap of children.
Only Sith deal in absolutes.
That isn't murder, that's warfare.
This person suggested shooting through a four-year-old to assassinate Elon Musk.
So that's who's back you have right now.
I fail to see any ethical difference between murdering children under conditions of "warfare" and murdering children via assassination. Both are equally horrific.
And yet you think someone who shoots through a four-year-old child to assassinate Elon Musk is heroic.
I think an ethical shooter would take every reasonable precaution to avoid hitting the human shield.
But in the vanishingly small hypothetical where it could not be avoided, then I would still consider the shooter a hero, yes.
Vanishingly small? He has literally been using his child as a human shield since the UHC CEO was assassinated. The vanishingly small hypothetical is where it can be avoided.
This really is exactly like the excuse the IDF gives to kill Palestinians. They're being used as human shields by Hamas, so it's justifiable.
I have no idea how often the human shield is wrapped around his head, but I would imagine any shooter who does their homework would be able to find many hours in the day when the child is not physically attached to him.
The obvious difference between this and the IDF is that, in this case, we have an actual human shield. Anyone who is paying attention knows that the IDF "human shield" justification is just a lie to cover for their atrocities.
stfu
No u
Did anyone that upvoted this see this line? WTF:
Nothing WTF about it, the trolley problem math is overwhelming. If you can kill one person to save a million, it is immoral to abstain.
If you won't kill the king because his child prince is an innocent, then you will be a peasant forever.
You're already talking about killing more than one person.
And if it's so immoral to abstain, why are you abstaining?
That's cool that you believe that edgelord shit, but around here we don't endorse killing children for lemmy karma upvotes. Take that shit elsewhere.
Edit: and to all you downvoting because you agree with edgelord krono here: walk your talk. Give me your PayPal. I'll wire you any money you need to accomplish your edgy online takes. I want to see how brave you are pointing a gun to an innocents child's face.
Fucking scum.
I hate to admit it but damnit, they're kinda right. At the core this really is a trolley problem. The whole point of the trolley problem is that it's a moral dilemma.
It's just feeling harder on y'all now, because now it's more real. Sure right now it's easier to not pull the lever, but if Trump and other oligarchs end up doing much worse things, would you regret not having pulled it?
The trolley problem was really always about revealing your values, and specifically if your morality chose the possible wellbeing of many over the few - even in tough situations. Because in real life, the choices aren't usually "1 vs 3" random people, but something like "1 terrible, 1 innocent, and 8 bad people" vs "society at large".
There is nothing inherently wrong with discussing the trolley problem. It comes up on a daily basis. So what?
When there is a direct call to action on an online forum to unalive someone by any means necessary even if it means killing innocent children then you better be ready to walk the talk or shut the fuck up. If you are so thirsty for the revolution, ill meet you at the front line but I want to see you there on day one. Otherwise, it's just online meme edgelord shit for karma upvotes and nothing more. We both know these individuals that are so brave with their calls to actions would rather open netflix and watch the next ep of bridgerton after their bout of online memes. So brave.
Edginess has nothing to do with it. Valuing one innocent life over the millions of other innocent lives, if that's the only realistic choice, is antisocial and selfish, and in reality makes someone responsible for the suffering of millions. It's a horrible hypothetical, one which hopefully never comes up again in history, and one which is unlikely to manifest in reality, but one where the outcomes are as clear as day.
I say 'again in history' because this is similar to the dilemma facing revolutions which rose against monarchy, where killing the royal children would prevent monarchists from trying to violently reinstate the monarchy with a war that would kill even more people. (I don't mean this to suggest nepo babies are inevitably going to follow their parent, even Elon's own supplies a counter-example)
post your address, loser
I'm not sure the best place to post this, but I would like to say I do regret this comment.
My honest intention was to make a provocative post that would generate a discussion on ethics and morality in the age of Luigi and Elon. My intention was to lay out a hypothetical scenario "if anyone wants to become a hero.." but with sober hindsight I now see how my words could be misconstrued into a call for violence, and that is deeply regrettable.
I was recently prescribed a new muscle relaxant for my rheumatoid arthritis, and I mixed it with a couple alcoholic drinks for the first time. The result was not some drastic change, but I did become unfiltered, sloppy, and inaccurate with my words, and I will not be making this mistake again.
In the future, I do intend to continue making provocative comments, but I am committing myself to no longer discussing violence in this context.
No, every single person would be a 'thousandaire'.
383,000,000,000 divided by 335,000,000 is 1,143 dollars per person.
That's what I get for leaving my phone unlocked.