this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2025
303 points (96.0% liked)

Canada

7997 readers
2449 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Related Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.

🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.

💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
otter
mp3
303
I Dared Defend Canada on X. The Response Was Chilling (thetyee.ca)
submitted 3 days ago by breakfastmtn to c/canada
88 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Rattled by a horde of MAGA trolls, here’s what I learned about today’s social media miasma.

Last Friday I made a post on Bluesky and X, concerning U.S. President Donald Trump’s description of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “Governor.” It occurred to me that, numb as we are to Trump’s stream of blather, the importance of that remark was being overlooked. It was an overt declaration by the president of the United States that he does not recognize Canadian sovereignty. That’s scary.

So, my post: “For a US president to refer to the Prime Minister of Canada as ‘Governor’ isn’t just rude. It’s a hostile act.”

The post got little attention on Bluesky. On X, for whatever reason, it went berserk. Over the weekend it racked up close to 3,000 reposts, over 29,000 “likes” and more than 5,000 replies. Those replies came almost entirely from Trump-loving trolls, piling scorn and abuse on my concerns. “Yeah but it’s Canada so who gives a fuck?” said one.

Do the responses represent a genuine glimpse of U.S. opinion on Trump’s bully-boy act?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Ok so nothing is genuine? That's your take?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Sounds like a reasonable conclusion.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That's the opposite or "reasonable" lol

[–] TheresNodiee 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I don't see what's unreasonable about saying that you shouldn't take the things you read on algorithmic social media sites as representative of any population at large. That it's not a "genuine" representation of any population.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Every social media is "algorithmic". So, yes, it's unreasonable to say you should take nothing you read anywhere as representative.

[–] TheresNodiee 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That... doesn't make any sense.

Every rabid beast is "dangerous". So, yes, it's unreasonable to say you should assume that if you run into one it will attack you.

That's what you sound like.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What a shitty analogy

[–] TheresNodiee 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

How is it different? You're basically saying that all social media is untrustworthy and so therefore it's ridiculous to not trust any of it. There's no logic there.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago

That's the opposite of what I'm saying.