Anyone know if this is true or not?
It’s like encountering a sudden storm at sea. But as long as you’re prepared, you can get through anything. I’ve been studying the “2025 Second-Hand Yacht Insurance Guide” lately. It’s like my “storm warning at sea,” telling me in advance how to save money and feel at ease, and be fully prepared.
Not entirely surprising if true.
Project 2025 goal is to spread their backwards ideology across the globe. They want to see the world burn.
They think being cruel to minorities and women will make their lives better. Cause they’re idiots. Or naive. Or hateful. Probably all of those, but that’s speculation.
they dont want to make anyones lives better except their own. Pieces of shit like those have been bitter about any improvement to womens rights because they had it good being able to abuse women and want it back. Also minorities are good scapegoat for any problems they cause, so their rights have to go too or the whole thing collapses eventually as people might catch on who is really to blame.
a lot of people knew this already, yes
Freedoms slowly get taken away.
I am not surprised in the slightest bit
Your title is misleading & false. The article is technically correct, but clunky.
Consider the title, Steam’s Content Removal Could Be A Wider Consequence Of Project 2025. The article misspells Russell’s name frequently. “Part of Vought and Project 2025’s plans are to remove Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA)”. So the Steam content removal…is a consequence. Who is dishing out the consequences?
Louis Rossmann will tell you, it’s Collective Shout. Collective Shout has no relation to Russell Vought…or even America. It’s a ragtag group of 1400 Australian fuckheads that complained to Mastercard, Visa who then put pressure on Steam. And yes. This was enabled thanks to Russell Vought & removal of Section 230 of the CDA.
Russell Vought isn’t a good guy by any means, but this specifically was done by Collective Shout’s 1400 Aussies bitching to American credit card companies & American businesses, threatening them & trying to dictate what they can sell to Americans. It’s…truly infuriating. I don’t go to their mom’s place of work & smack the dick out of her mouth, I don’t write them emails & tell them how to run Australia. So kindly return the favor, don’t fuck with the US. Like what the hell.
The thing that’s been bothering me is, since when did a local, “ragtag group” of activists have this much influence on the actions of massive corporations? Bigger, more powerful groups have tried and failed to make changes like this over and over again. Why does collective shout have so much pull? It doesn’t make any sense to me.
This is quite literally the crux of the post: Who is actually making these decisions? Because there is, in fact, a zero percent chance that any number of Australian wokescolds would have leverage to force MASTERCARD AND VISA, the two global monopoly payment processors to change their practices just because the australians dont agree with the content of games.
This is a top down decision coming from the owners of visa. Any attempt to backpedal this into the hands of some activist group is the most disrespectful patronizing I’ve seen in my entire life. I’m glad you and others are calling this shit out for the farce that it is.
You mean to tell me the most successful activist movement in the last 50 years has been a single week protest lobbied at the most powerful capitalist institutions in the world, and the payment processors were bent over backwards for it? As if thats definitely not a giant, flaming red flag in itself?? It feels like the most obvious scapegoating of all time: a faceless Australian group nobody ever heard of before suddenly wrenched the arm of an economic lynchpin? No.
Visa and Mastercard are doing this because this is what they want to do. No amount of protest would achieve this outcome save the literal socialist revolution at their doorstep. I dont care what any report says, this is top down. Visa is not exposed to any risk by any protest, it is laughable to suggest otherwise.
With that out of the way, we can discuss the real matters of import: why are payment processors taking on the role of decency enforcement in global markets? What are their goals, who is making these decisions, and why is any government allowing these processors to dictate commerce within their borders unilaterally? Really and truly I dont even care about the games. I want names and faces of the people in charge of visa and Mastercard who are making these decisions, and I want them brought into a court room to clearly explain to everyone in the world what their exact reasoning is for caving to a historically insignificant protest. Stop killing games has been going simultaneously to this and, with millions of signatures, the response has been slander from the companies targeted. This collective shout bs is an absolute sham.
No fucking way this dude’s name is actually Vought…
Correlation is not causation.
I don’t understand the hate, so I’ll try explaining myself and either redeem myself or dig myself deeper.
Religious zealots have been trying to ban explicit material since forever.
Saying Project 2025 caused the Steam ban is like saying Tipper Gore caused Project 2025.
EDIT: Ok, I went back to make sure I didn’t miss something, and I did. This 2025 guy’s group pressured the payment companies to put the squeeze on steam, who folded like a house of cards.
My bad, he did kind of cause this, or at least instigate it.
Did you read all 900 pages? I sure skimmed but didn’t read it fully. Its entirely possible.
More importantly, if we dont act collectively all over the globe to end this tide of fascism only more sensorship will come.
This is not an end but a beginning.
these people have been planning on this for lot longer than a year. christians have been trying to ban video games for decades. the only reason this group hasn’t come after more games is because they know they don’t yet have enough politicians behind them to manage it.
It’s been interesting to see this agenda switch from D to R over the least 30 years in the US.
Christians are evil
All religions are evil.
Right on man. Fuckin’ Buddhists. Probably don’t even use Linux.
Buddhist nationalists do genocide all the same, like in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_genocide
It’s almost as if it’s the nationalism part that makes them do that rather than having anything to do with their religion.
Same with christianity, the core religion is somewhat fine, it’s the church and the people that used it as a tool that arent.
Yeah I don’t disagree. However, in practice the tool is what it’s used for, e.g. guns. I’m pro-gun, but it’s foolish to not understand where the gun control people are coming from. Religion is the same.
“20 Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property."
Exodus 21:20-21
“But they told me the bible was only about love thy neighbor and forgiving the sinners!”
Buddhists are also capable of committing violence in the name of their religion. Look at Myanmar
Met this Amish person once, didn’t even known what Linux was. The heathen.
“I use Arch, btw”
- Richard Dawkins
Do you know about Myanmar?
I don’t want to come off as pedantic, but what we’re dealing with in the US is a very strange and successful breed of “Christian Nationalism.”
Essentially, it’s a belief that ultra-conservative Christianity is the only legitimate religion and that the USA is a Christian nation.
It probably comes as no surprise that these people heavily influenced the Confederacy, is strongly white-supremecist, anti-vice, etc, and has been an anathema in this country since before the states actually formed.
Christians themselves are… A problem, but not the problem. It’s these Christian nationalists. They’re loud. They want you to think all Christians believe what they do too. They also tend to drown out opposing Christian speakers by being louder than them too.
It’s one of the reasons why MLK Jr was hated so much by Hoover, by the south, etc. He was a Christian pastor, and stood against everything they did.
It’s important that we don’t group Christians in with Christian Nationalists. It’s very difficult but necessary.
Was it nationalists carrying out the crusades? Diddling kids? Demonizing LBGTQ? Seems like a convenient deflection.
The existence of good does not justify the evil, and there has been way more harm than good in the name of gods, abrahamic or not.
I do not dispute that. I am stating that this power grab is Christian Nationalism. If you read my comment, about half-way through I said Christians are a problem, but not the problem right now.
I also would argue that MLK Jr. did much more good than any evil.
And eventually, we always, always figure out their leaders don’t abide to the rules they set for others.
I do agree, but I still think that all religions are a cancer on humanity, harming us, dividing us and holding us back. Religion is the enemy of progress.
Humans are the ones that are harming and dividing us. If religion is gone they’ll find a new way to do it. Us vs them mentality is part of human nature and has always attached itself to anything that can be called ours vs theirs. Religion, politics, sports, skin color, language, the fucking phone brand you use, you name it.
Yeah, that’s all fine and good.
Just don’t confuse “cocaine” with “cocaine laced with fentanyl.” One is significantly worse.
Religion is a tool of control. Some of it is benign, even beneficial, but as with all power and money rich platforms, unscrupulous forces creep in because they see the opportunities and profit.
The best counter example I’ve seen is Shintoism.
But on a separate note, i believe religion has an evolutionary advantage vs logic and reason, as evidenced by it being so prevalent throughout human history. So in the most literal sense, i believe humans wouldn’t have any progress without religion.
In order to survive, humans need to build societies that can adapt to the ever changing environments we find ourselves in.
One possibility is to use pure science, logic, and reason: educate every child on the scientific method, teach them how to not fall for logical fallacies, to be skeptical, to demand extraordinary evidence to support extraordinary claims, to repeat experiments and engage in peer review, to create ethical frameworks, and have a logical justification for the actions you take…
Another possibility is to use religion: brainwash a kid on what “good” looks like, and show them how to put on blinders to anything that might threaten that. Johnny down the street is “sinning”? Make him stop, that hurts our society. Father Dale is touching kids? Don’t lose sight of the goal, Father Dale is a great man, this is a personal struggle that we can help him through.
Which of those two methods of adaptation requires less energy? Because when an organism has to evolve, the organism that can do it using less energy will have the advantage. Religion, or the concept of morality in general, is a society’s selection pressure on itself. The best we can do is acknowledge this, and learn to wield it as a tool. And I believe that many leaders throughout human history, both political and religious, understood this well.
Mostly because of all the stupid.
Painting with such a broad brush is how these people got to where they are now, don’t make the same mistakes they did.
Lmao thanks for the heads-up, past me.
Wait, how do you get that? I also use Voyager, but not seeing that :/
Edit: it’s called user tags. It’s not shared as far I’m concerned.
Press and hold on any user and you can add a tag. It is incredibly useful for a myriad of reasons. I started implementing a system for sharing/community tags but I didn’t like the implications of having a parallel voting system to the existing one and scrapped it.
Edit: the best part of the feature is that it can link you to why you created the tag. In this case the user in question argued that supporting women’s rights is the same thing as Islamophobia.
Thanks neighbor
It’s also a feature of Piefed.
It seems properly federating images to Lemmy is not quite there yet :(
Edit: Messed up a copy/paste.
I couldn’t find the exact context of what you linked, but down from it I saw your opinion, which I don’t agree with, and doesn’t say what you’re claiming now.
I honestly don’t understand what you’re asking of me. Women having equal rights is a binary thing, they either do or don’t.
This is wrong. They can be equal in some parts and unequal in others. No culture gives identical rights to all other cultures. There are degrees to equality. It isn’t all or nothing. I would say most of the west is more equal than countries that follow Islam as a state religion, but most of them don’t have total equality. I assume you agree with that, right? And Saudi Arabia is better than Iran, right? Not significantly, but there are degrees to it, right?
Painting it as binary all or nothing is wrong, and probably is antithetical to progress. If it’s all or nothing, and something would take a step in the right direction, then why take that step if it isn’t all the way, right? Treating it as binary is bad.
I should have been more specific. Probably the standard pig headed refusal to acknowledge a point 🤷♂️
Said the guy that actively endorses a fascist military coup.
You’re flat out lying here. I oppose Trump’s DC police action, and basically everything Trump has ever done or said. What I said, clearly, was that the Mayor of DC instituted the curfew - for a reason and months ago + extended it a few times - and it has nothing to do with Trump. Which the OP of that post was too lazy to know before posting and misleading people. Accuracy matters.
All anyone has to do is search “dc curfew” to find nothing but articles about Muriel Bowser’s curfew. You will find nothing about Trump.
So yeah, you tend to earn the tag I gave you.
What I gather from the linked conversation: (In regards to a joke where a boy turns out to have a polygamous dad)
Sure, but that’s universal. Most of the Islamic theocratic have this problem, and it’s a point of general focus… but Islam is their excuse, not a functional cause. It’s not like Mormons did it any better.
Islamic theocratics are not the same as muslims. Theocracy is where the law of one’s god is seen as the ruling body, and tend to be more of the extremists of a religion - in Islam’s case, the ones more likely to use religion as a weapon of power to have multiple wives. Nothing in that conversation came across as “Being pro-Islam is being anti-feminism”.
I’d also point out, the user made several efforts to ask for better explanation from those disagreeing, but everyone was just digging for more words from him instead of discussing openly. This is how disagreement is manufactured.
It’s a consistent pattern of behavior from that person, which is why one thread might seem like people are overbearing. At some point you get sick of the disingenuous faux-intellectual “just asking questions”.
You’re claiming a pattern, but so far I’ve only been pointed to one example. On the other hand, the other participant in that conversation, you, has been posting giant screengrabs of this individual where they are claiming…that we shouldn’t generalize evil groups?
I’m all too aware of how people can “Sealion” the energy out of a discussion. But even your choice examples aren’t painting yourself in the best light here, nor a very strong impression towards Zorque. I could yet be convinced, but not so far.
Oooh how do you do that user tag function? I couldn’t find it when I looked just now and it appears as though we’re using the same frontend…?
He is right you know
Religion is the closest thing to true evil that exist on this planet. Insane cultists shouldn’t be allowed around children. Not even their own (they tend to mutilate them in order to mark them as members of their insane cult).
The bullshit going on in the USA under the christian name is short sighted, stupid and lacks empathy. Christianity isn’t USA fundamentalism tho.
No, but we’re doing a fantastic job exporting a lot of the doctrine and repackaging it.
Its Republicans. Don’t blame the religion. Republicans want fascism and they want to control everyone’s thoughts and behaviors because they’re wired to be subservient to authoritarians. They hate that so many of us have a mind of our own.
I’ll happily blame all religion, thank you. Nobody should build a worldview where an unaccountable (and imperceptible) third party is responsible for moral decisions.
There’s a distinctive difference between american evangelists and other christian groups, for starters that the evangelists have been integrated in the state-religion the USA has been running at least since the cold war., and they are actively utilized by the Republicans. This also means that those evangelists believe that in the US white nationalists should be in power.
Please note that the “christian” part in this has gone pretty far from any christian roots - it’s for the most part just utilized to identify the in-group and to radicalize members. The quip “Y’all qaeda” comes pretty close to the truth - they are just as radical and socially regressive as any other islamic sect that would use terror to achieve their goals.
christians have been…
A few closeted and bitter homosexuals in denial have been…
This comment was reported as homophobic.
I believe the meaning of the comment to be
Republicans projecting - again
Leaving it up for @Korkki@lemmy.ml to clarify.
Just saying that those who are most obsessive about policing morality or sexuality of others are often just hypocritical/ in denial themselves.
It will never happen on a large scale. Not as long as there is this much money to be made. I have no doubts these freaks will keep trying and make our lives harder, though.
Anthony Comstock.
J. Edgar Hoover.
Joseph McCarthy.
Roy Cohn.
Donald Trump.
Willful traitors all. Have it writ upon thy meager graves, “destroyed the union just so people wouldn’t masturbate.”
There’s more, I know. But those fellas are all linked.
Only the most chaste men among them.
They’ve been playing the very long game of trying to control human behavior for centuries, not just decades. The one thing to note is that the United States began as a bunch of colonies run by ministers, and the fundies want to go back to that theocratic form of rule. That by the 19th century the temperance movement came from the dozens of Christian subsects. Yeah, they also extended it to anything that did not define as “Christian” behavior, including choice of ideologies (socialism = bad), gender (male or female = good), source of knowledge (Bible > science), beliefs (they have veiled Islamophobia), and even eating and sexual habits.
Now – based on their basic blueprint – they want to artificially induce the Second Coming by trying to get their fucking project off the ground, and impose control on everyone else.
BTW, any collapse or devolution of the United States and the Western world would come off as a wonderful realization for Putin, Dugin, Kyrill, and their cronies.
First paragraph is about what I found out myself. Might add to that that they are the ones responsible for the American mindset of sex and nipples.
And yes, Jesus definitely looked like the one who would be selected for a “random intensive control not based on individual suspicion” at the airport. He was born in today’s Israel after all, parents from there as well.
What an average man living in Jesus’ time and place looked like.
Small correction, Jesus was born in Bethlehem, which is in Palestine.
Going to need done links for you claims chief
Google it boss
Most of that comment is basic American history chief
They? For centuries? Who is “they” that has been this organized for “centuries”? The fucking illuminati? The masonic order?
Maybe you’re exaggerating a bit?
Conservatives…? How is that not obvious? It’s clearly true.
It isn’t though? Conservatism has changed meanings quite a bit from the 17th century from 1620’s Massachusetts Puritans and later Loyalists to the crown. Note that neither of these have anything to do with imposing moral values and promoting censorship.
In fact, the push for “Religious values” like censorship in the case of this thread has only been around the US since the 1920’s. Which if that’s what you mean by “centuries” it’s a bit of a stretch since that is a single century.
Moreso, if you want to trace those ideologies back to politicians in the US, you’ll find maybe a couple of mentions of this in people like Buckley (in 1955) or Goldwater (in 1960) and of course from Reagan.
That is why I am saying “centuries” is an exaggeration.
You are interpreting everything extremely narrowly. I don’t care if “conservative” wasn’t what they used to be called, but there have always been groups of people imposing social control, and there’s a common thread running through that over time. The long game is paying off, because they have not let up. If you want to get super pedantic about it, everything breaks down here and I’m not sure what the point of that is.
You are not the OP, but let me take a stab at what you’re saying. Conservative has always been a word to describe a train of thought or ideal to not change from how things are.
The objective of that can change wildly throughout the years to the point of it even being contradictory to itself. (for example Greek conservatism probably wanted sexual freedom and current conservatives want “traditional sexual values” from a Christian point of view which is absolutely contradictory. )
I’m saying that conflating a group of people, “conservatives” in this case, isn’t a group of people that have been around for centuries plotting against some idea. They have been different groups trying to hold on to the world that they know and dislike change.
If you mean “conservatives” as it is currently known in the US, then yes that is a group of people who have been plotting on how to force their “ideals” on us but it’s hardly “centuries” as how OP put it. It’s just been from the 1950’s.
This is why I’m saying that OP sounds like a conspiracy nut.
The reason why I want to point this out is because claiming a group is centuries old adds to the belief that they are an entity that has survived massive world view changes; Colonialism, Revolution, Civil Wars, World Wars. All of this makes them seem like an invincible group, but in reality they aren’t that. They’ve only been around since slightly before Reagan and they are not absolute and they can be overthrown and toppled.
We should not equate “conservatism” with groups that advocated for feudalism or monarchy, but we should totally treat them like both of these were treated at the end of their era. We should get rid of backwards, draconic ways of thinking and always move forward.
I appreciate that there are nuances here that aren’t even just pedantry, however I knew what they meant. Those imposing social control via morality. That idea transcends specific ideology imo. I used to believe this kind of thinking was on the decline, but in my lifetime I seem to have discovered that no it is not. I want to believe this is a temporary setback but I can’t bring myself to believe something unless I really see the evidence for it. I see a lot against it.
Christianity.
“they” in this sense is everyone who has historically tried to control and repress others to their own benefit.
Traditionally that’s the religious. But it’s also the capitalists. And now they seem to be working together.
Funny how all the Yanks specifically blaming this on Australia are quiet now.
Neigsendoig and I are not really surprised by this. We had an inkling this was part of Project 2025. In particular, they just wanted Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act removed, though they were already censoring using foreign censorship partners even before P2025.
called it.
Thank god they can’t do shit to TPB and its ilk since those are already illegal anyway.
