Funny events in anti-woke world

Gergar12

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
3,923
864
118
Country
United States
So, your typical American paranoia brought on by cold war era propaganda then.
I don't agree with communism as well as capitalism, and socialism.

You do realize what communism is right. You have no political freedom to decide your leaders, their policies, and even quality of life stuff like free speech, and so fore. By the way, I am not talking about China which is a pragmatic autocratic ethnostate. I am talking about Lenin and Khrushchev's USSR. Which is generally the best USSR/Communism at its peak. It's great if that one leader is smart, or the politburo act all act like philosopher-kings or dynamic people. But eventually given the single or few failure points, you get someone whose better at kissing ass, then increasing their nation's power relative to others.

The problem with capitalism/liberal democracy is that it pretends to be democratic, and has no elites/nobles/kings. But a president or prime minister is basically a lesser king. The nobles are the business oligarchs, and the elites are the establishment big club political, and economic upper class. Still a few failure points. If your elite is corrupt, your screwed.

Same with socialism or democratic socialism, it basically combines the two, and your elites become academics, bureaucrats. So if the academics are stupid and out of touched, or the bureaucrats are lazy, you are screwed as well. More failure points than capitalism, but not good enough to stop stagnation if rent-seeking for example, and ideology. takes hold.

Edit: To those likely asking what I am, I believe in universal direct democracy in the workplace and political system with an educated populace.
 
Last edited:

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
I wonder whether it should change at all, and we shouldn't just be expected to understand the relevant context of sex as opposed to gender.
To play the role of Devil advocate a moment as to why that won't be accepted:

Sex is also a spectrum itself and can't merely be defined as XX and XY and thus we can't use male and female to truly represent everyone because intersex people exist that are typical XX or XY individuals also that then brings up ideas of biological determinism and invalidates trans identities by denying work that has suggested Trans peoples brain structure more resemble those of the sex opposite their birth sex.

Well, we do that with names, don't we? Unless you try to force people to use names you designate for them.
Not fully because I've not heard of any-one being allowed to name their child or change their name to a series of offensive words.

But those most distressed about a great reset don't like the devil they know. They have proven willing to sell their souls to every cartoonishly corrupt demagogue offering to fight the devil they know.
Because the people they throw in behind often draw the ire of certain groups who happen to also be the kind of groups and people suggesting the Great Reset be done. Just because you fight "The Devil" doesn't mean you're willing to take the risk what replace it won't be worse.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,476
7,051
118
Country
United States
To play the role of Devil advocate a moment as to why that won't be accepted:
You suck at devil's advocacy.

The reason it won't be accepted is that men don't want to be called women, women don't want to be called men, and some people don't want to be called either.
I don't think it is really practical to have a massive profusion of individual pronouns in the same way we have individual names. It sort of defeats part of the purpose of a pronoun, if nothing else.
Why not? We got more than two names. Japanese has 8 different first person pronouns and they aren't exactly melting down under the complexity.

Internet worst case scenarios don't track with meatspace realities. The odds of you personally needing to know more than that is very slim unless you're doing specific advocacy work

Except it's not a lawsuit it's a human rights court abuse case being brought by Yaniv.
That's a lawsuit. And it got rejected. Tell me: do you want the government to be able to categorically deny its citizens access to human civil rights courts at it's own discretion?

I wonder whether it should change at all, and we shouldn't just be expected to understand the relevant context of sex as opposed to gender.
If you want to argue about "relevant context", why the hell is saying "pregnant people" in context to people who are pregnant or "people with prostates" with regards to, well, people with prostates such a radical idea?

Like, you want people to just "understand the context" as defenders of women shout that women aren't people? Come the fuck on. Why aren't they understanding the context that we're talking about fucking vaccinations! The gender bullshit is a sideshow when the actual problem is vaccine hesitancy. It's brain rot
 

Cheetodust

Elite Member
Jun 2, 2020
1,583
2,293
118
Country
Ireland
We have entire political dynasties of families happening just fine under capitalism pillaging national stockpiles for personal gain, but the real problem is the specter of communism.
In many developed countries we're at or beyond the levels of wealth inequality of pre-revolution France. Like why do people keep acting like capitalism doesn't lead to massive abuses of power?
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
You suck at devil's advocacy.

The reason it won't be accepted is that men don't want to be called women, women don't want to be called men, and some people don't want to be called either.
Why not? We got more than two names. Japanese has 8 different first person pronouns and they aren't exactly melting down under the complexity.
Yours sucks worse because the specifics presented that I was arguing against was not using gender but sex. Yours relied on bringing in concepts of gender not sex to the argument. Want to try actually presenting a counter argument using the specific restrictions of not being allowed to use Gender but only talk about it from the perspective of sex and that almost entirely alone?


Why not? We got more than two names. Japanese has 8 different first person pronouns and they aren't exactly melting down under the complexity.
8 < 107
8 < 224

That's your explanation.

Internet worst case scenarios don't track with meatspace realities. The odds of you personally needing to know more than that is very slim unless you're doing specific advocacy work
Until you run into an activist with an axe to grind and end up becoming a target to crusade against.

That's a lawsuit. And it got rejected. Tell me: do you want the government to be able to categorically deny its citizens access to human civil rights courts at it's own discretion?
The Gynaecologist one hasn't been rejected it's on hold along with like 20+ more because Yaniv hasn't yet paid the losses of the first case yet. Also deny them being able to bring insanely frivolous ones that can be seen as just that would mean it would help actual cases get seen quicker.

If you want to argue about "relevant context", why the hell is saying "pregnant people" in context to people who are pregnant or "people with prostates" with regards to, well, people with prostates such a radical idea?

Like, you want people to just "understand the context" as defenders of women shout that women aren't people? Come the fuck on. Why aren't they understanding the context that we're talking about fucking vaccinations! The gender bullshit is a sideshow when the actual problem is vaccine hesitancy. It's brain rot
Ah yes lets totally lets make all food gluten free cause the what less than 1% of people like me can't eat wheat. Be careful how much you decide to start accommodating because I'd say my massive and rather nasty upset bowels that can be bad for up to 2 weeks if I eat what might be a bit more serious than some-one feeling a little left out.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
In many developed countries we're at or beyond the levels of wealth inequality of pre-revolution France. Like why do people keep acting like capitalism doesn't lead to massive abuses of power?
Because Chernobyl happened under communism.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,476
7,051
118
Country
United States
Not fully because I've not heard of any-one being allowed to name their child or change their name to a series of offensive words.
Only 4 US states have any rules saying you can't name your kid or change your name to an obscenity. People generally don't do that because it's rock stupid.

Out of curiosity, do you consider asking somebody to use the singular they or a neo-pronoun the same as naming a child a slur against their will?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrCalavera

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
Only 4 US states have any rules saying you can't name your kid or change your name to an obscenity. People generally don't do that because it's rock stupid.

Out of curiosity, do you consider asking somebody to use the singular they or a neo-pronoun the same as naming a child a slur against their will?
As a Neo-pronoun can be anything it can literally be a slur and as you said you should use it when asked because that's their pronoun choice.
 

Agema

Do everything and feel nothing
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
9,217
6,487
118
Why not? We got more than two names. Japanese has 8 different first person pronouns and they aren't exactly melting down under the complexity.
But they aren't individualised pronouns, are they? They will reflect certain circumstances - likely to be things such as gender, age, relative social class, formality / informality, and some might be dialects. As with, say, French with tu / vous for the singular second person. There are guidelines dictating which one to use, and they are still generically applicable.

Communication is instrinsically a communal business, because it is pointless with only one person. In that sense, there is some need for communication to serve everyone: more than just the individual who wants to make up new words and demand others hold to them. It is a burden to expect people to hold a vast range of individual pronouns (remember, this could theoretically be billions) and their risk of discomfort in case they make error, plus the increased risk of error and consequent unhappiness of the person whose pronoun is fumbled. Bluntly, it is a point where an individual's right to self-expression needs to take a backseat to society communicating smoothly.

Or delete all gender-specific pronouns in entirety: one pronoun set for anyone and everyone (I actually find that idea quite attractive, because it also has the beauty of simplicity). Or just give up on (third person singular) pronouns entirely. They are technically unncessary - after all a pronoun is simply a convenient, generic substitution for another noun or group of nouns. If people want individualisation, cut the Gordian knot by scrapping the substitution.

Thus a limited number of established neopronouns to reflect some gender variability, okay (and I think one set e.g. ze/hir is enough). Individualised ones, no.

If you want to argue about "relevant context", why the hell is saying "pregnant people" in context to people who are pregnant or "people with prostates" with regards to, well, people with prostates such a radical idea?
It's not that radical an idea in a sense. The consistency of how it is done, however, matters.

Like, you want people to just "understand the context" as defenders of women shout that women aren't people? Come the fuck on. Why aren't they understanding the context that we're talking about fucking vaccinations! The gender bullshit is a sideshow when the actual problem is vaccine hesitancy. It's brain rot
Cool your chops. I'm not defending anyone saying "women aren't people".
 

XsjadoBlayde

~it ends here~
Apr 29, 2020
3,376
3,500
118
Another leaky moment.


The secret deals and hidden assets of some of the world’s richest and most powerful people have been revealed in the biggest trove of leaked offshore data in history.

Branded the Pandora papers, the cache includes 11.9m files from companies hired by wealthy clients to create offshore structures and trusts in tax havens such as Panama, Dubai, Monaco, Switzerland and the Cayman Islands.

They expose the secret offshore affairs of 35 world leaders, including current and former presidents, prime ministers and heads of state. They also shine a light on the secret finances of more than 300 other public officials such as government ministers, judges, mayors and military generals in more than 90 countries.

The files include disclosures about major donors to the Conservative party, raising difficult questions for Boris Johnson as his party meets for its annual conference.

More than 100 billionaires feature in the leaked data, as well as celebrities, rock stars and business leaders. Many use shell companies to hold luxury items such as property and yachts, as well as incognito bank accounts. There is even art ranging from looted Cambodian antiquities to paintings by Picasso and murals by Banksy.

The Pandora papers reveal the inner workings of what is a shadow financial world, providing a rare window into the hidden operations of a global offshore economy that enables some of the world’s richest people to hide their wealth and in some cases pay little or no tax.

What are the Pandora papers?

There are emails, memos, incorporation records, share certificates, compliance reports and complex diagrams showing labyrinthine corporate structures. Often, they allow the true owners of opaque shell companies to be identified for the first time.

The files were leaked to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) in Washington. It shared access to the leaked data with select media partners including the Guardian, BBC Panorama, Le Monde and the Washington Post. More than 600 journalists have sifted through the files as part of a massive global investigation.

The Pandora papers represent the latest – and largest in terms of data volume – in a series of major leaks of financial data that have convulsed the offshore world since 2013.

Setting up or benefiting from offshore entities is not itself illegal, and in some cases people may have legitimate reasons, such as security, for doing so. But the secrecy offered by tax havens has at times proven attractive to tax evaders, fraudsters and money launderers, some of whom are exposed in the files.

Perhaps the most significant offshore leak to date was the 2016 Panama papers, which consisted of 2.6 terabytes of data leaked from the law firm Mossack Fonseca.

The following year saw the release of the Paradise papers, most of which were from the offshore provider Appleby, which was founded in Bermuda. In total, that cache consisted of 1.4 terabytes of data.

Containing 2.94 terabytes, the Pandora papers is the largest of the three leaks. The files also come from a much wider array of offshore providers than previous leaks: 14 in total. Locations range from Vietnam to Belize and Singapore, and to far-flung archipelagos such as the Bahamas and the Seychelles.


Other wealthy individuals and companies stash their assets offshore to avoid paying tax elsewhere, a legal activity estimated to cost governments billions in lost revenues.

After more than 18 months analysing the data in the public interest, the Guardian and other media outlets will publish their findings over the coming days, beginning with revelations about the offshore financial affairs of some of the most powerful political leaders in the world.

They include the ruler of Jordan, King Abdullah II, who, leaked documents reveal, has amassed a secret $100m property empire spanning Malibu, Washington and London. The king declined to answer specific questions but said there would be nothing improper about him owning properties via offshore companies. Jordan appeared to have blocked the ICIJ website on Sunday, hours before the Pandora papers launched.


The files also show that Azerbaijan’s ruling Aliyev family has traded close to £400m of UK property in recent years. One of their properties was sold to the Queen’s crown estate, which is now looking into how it came to pay £67m to a company that operated as a front for the family that runs a country routinely accused of corruption. The Aliyevs declined to comment.

The Pandora papers also threaten to cause political upsets for two European Union leaders. The prime minister of the Czech republic, Andrej Babiš, who is up for election this week, is facing questions over why he used an offshore investment company to acquire a $22m chateau in the south of France. He too declined to comment.


And in Cyprus, itself a controversial offshore centre, the president, Nicos Anastasiades, may be asked to explain why a law firm he founded was accused of hiding the assets of a controversial Russian billionaire behind fake company owners. The firm denies any wrongdoing, while the Cypriot president says he ceased having an active role in its affairs after becoming leader of the opposition in 1997.

Not everyone named in the Pandora papers is accused of wrongdoing. The leaked files reveals that Tony and Cherie Blair saved £312,000 in property taxes when they purchased a London building partially owned by the family of a prominent Bahraini minister.

The former prime minister and his wife bought the £6.5m office in Marylebone by acquiring a British Virgin Islands (BVI) offshore company. While the move was not illegal, and there is no evidence the Blairs proactively sought to avoid property taxes, the deal highlights a loophole that has enabled wealthy property owners not to pay a tax that is commonplace for ordinary Britons.

The leaked records vividly illustrate the central coordinating role London plays in the murky offshore world. The UK capital is home to wealth managers, law firms, company formation agents and accountants. All exist to serve their ultra-rich clients. Many are foreign-born tycoons who enjoy “non-domicile” status, which means they pay no tax on their overseas assets.

Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, who was elected in 2019 on a pledge to clean up his country’s notoriously corrupt and oligarch-influenced economy, is also named in the leak. During the campaign, Zelenskiy transferred his 25% stake in an offshore company to a close friend who now works as the president’s top adviser, the files suggest. Zelenskiy declined to comment and it is unclear if he remains a beneficiary.

The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, whom the US suspects of having a secret fortune, does not appear in the files by name. But numerous close associates do, including his best friend from childhood – the late Petr Kolbin – whom critics have called a “wallet” for Putin’s own wealth, and a woman the Russian leader was allegedly once romantically involved with. None responded to invitations to comment.

The Pandora papers also place a revealing spotlight on the offshore system itself. In a development likely to prove embarrassing for the US president, Joe Biden, who has pledged to lead efforts internationally to bring transparency to the global financial system, the US emerges from the leak as a leading tax haven. The files suggest the state of South Dakota, in particular, is sheltering billions of dollars in wealth linked to individuals previously accused of serious financial crimes.

The offshore trail also stretches from Africa to Latin America to Asia, and is likely to pose difficult questions for politicians across the world. In Pakistan, Moonis Elahi, a prominent minister in prime minister Imran Khan’s government, contacted an offshore provider in Singapore about investing $33.7m.

In Kenya, the president, Uhuru Kenyatta, has portrayed himself as an enemy of corruption. In 2018, Kenyatta told the BBC: “Every public servant’s assets must be declared publicly so that people can question and ask: what is legitimate?”

He will come under pressure to explain why he and his close relatives amassed more than $30m of offshore wealth, including property in London. Kenyatta did not respond to enquiries about whether his family wealth was declared to relevant authorities in Kenya.


The Pandora papers also reveal some of the unseen repercussions of previous offshore leaks, which spurred modest reforms in some parts of the world, such as the BVI, which now keeps a record of the real owners of companies registered there. However, the newly leaked data shows money shifting around offshore destinations, as wealthy clients and their advisers adjust to new realities.

Some clients of Mossack Fonseca, the now defunct law firm at the heart of the 2016 Panama papers disclosures, simply transferred their companies to rival providers such as another global trust and corporate administrator with a major office in London, whose data is in the new trove of leaked files.

Asked why he was migrating the new company, one customer wrote bluntly: “Business decision to exit following the Panama papers.” Another agent said the industry had always “adapted” to external pressure.

Some leaked files appear to show some in the industry seeking to circumvent new privacy regulations. One Swiss lawyer refused to email the names of his high-value customers to a service provider in the BVI, following new legislation. Instead, he sent them by airmail, with strict instructions they should not be processed in any “electronic way”. The identity of another beneficial owner was shared via WhatsApp.

“The purpose of this way to proceed is to enable you to comply with BVI rules,” the lawyer wrote. Referring to Mossack Fonseca, the lawyer added: “You are obliged to keep secrecy for our clients and to not make feasible at all a second ‘Panama papers’ story that happened to one of your competitors.”

Gerard Ryle, the director of the ICIJ, said leading politicians who organised their finances in tax havens had a stake in the status quo, and were likely to be an obstacle to reform of the offshore economy. “When you have world leaders, when you have politicians, when you have public officials, all using the secrecy and all using this world, then I don’t think we’re going to see an end to it.”
Tho just like the Panama leak, I've no doubt it will get conveniently buried and forgotten for next elections while the journalists involved get murdered for their revealing contributions so it all still somehow changes nothing. We are fucked, stop bringing children into this slow motion mass suicide.
 

XsjadoBlayde

~it ends here~
Apr 29, 2020
3,376
3,500
118



Bruce Gerencser was raised in an evangelical household, was educated in an evangelical school, married the daughter of an evangelical Baptist minister, and soon became a fundamentalist Baptist preacher himself.

He freely admits that the gospel he preached, at times, was extreme.

“Our beliefs were quite fundamentalist. We were young Earth creationists—you know, the Earth was 6,000 years old,” Gerencser told VICE News. “We had a long list of rules and standards that govern human behavior, everything from premarital sex and adultery. We were certainly homophobic, or at least I was personally homophobic. Everything was strictly controlled.”

But in 2005, after 25 years as a pastor, Gerencser gave it all up. Three years later, he renounced Christianity and became an atheist and a humanist, after becoming disillusioned with the church’s lurch to the right.

Now in his mid-70s, Bruce lives with his wife of 43 years just outside the small town of Bryan, Ohio, and he spends his time fighting back against the ills he sees within the church. Most recently that fight has seen him highlight and take on those spreading the gospel of QAnon.

What he didn’t expect was that one of the people he’d be up against was his own son.

Gerencser describes his adult son, whom he didn’t want to name, as a “good kid, polite kid” and an “awesome son,” but he recalls that in January 2020 something changed, and soon he was having discussions about apocalyptic forces of evil and a coming storm.

“Next thing I know, he's buying a large number of firearms and ammunition and a bulletproof vest and warning that he’s preparing for what's coming next,” Gerencser said. “And, you know, and I would say that what's coming next, what we're going to have open warfare in the middle of Bryan, Ohio.”

Like many who’ve fallen into QAnon conspiracy theories, Gerencser’s son has also embraced even more violent extremist groups, joining the Three Percenters militia group and espousing support for the leader of the Proud Boys.

But aside from the guns and militias, what shocked Gerencser the most was when his son one day turned around and said he’d returned to the church, joining a local Southern Baptist congregation.


When Gerencser asked his son why he’d rejoined the church, his son told him: “Because that pastor believes the same things I do.”

Gerencser is part of a small but dedicated group of current and former pastors attempting to counter the threat posed by the spread of QAnon within the evangelical community, something that’s happening from the pulpit and in congregations. While the number of pastors and churches openly embracing QAnon is limited, the conspiracy is spreading silently and quickly within the community, taking hold at a time when the church is hemorrhaging parishioners. Despite the dangers posed by QAnon within the church, very few are speaking up about the threat, preferring to bury their heads in the sand and hope the danger passes.

“The danger in my mind is existential: This is the most serious problem within Protestant Christianity that I've seen in my lifetime,” Pastor Derek Kubilius, vicar of Uniontown United Methodist Church in Uniontown, Ohio, and the host of Crossover Q, a podcast that aims to prevent the spread of QAnon conspiracies within the Christian community, told VICE News.


QAnon likes to portray itself as non-political, non-racist, nonviolent, and non-denominational, but even a cursory look at its tenets and beliefs will quickly shatter that illusion.

“QAnon is a movement targeted at conservative, white, Republican evangelicals, and anyone else who comes along for the ride is welcome but unnecessary,” said a prominent QAnon researcher who uses the name Dapper Gander, a pseudonym designed to protect his family from harassment.

“Its trappings are the trappings of Christian dominionism, assuring followers that ‘God wins’ and predicting that a series of events will unfold that are eerily similar to many of the events of the prophesied end-times in the Bible.”

Apocalypticism has always been present in American Christianity, and its popularity has waxed and waned over the years. But the rise of Donald Trump and his embrace of QAnon conspiracies has intensified these feelings of good versus evil, of dark powers at work, that the end of time is nearing. Add in the pandemic, and you’ve got a perfect environment for QAnon conspiracies to take hold in the church.


“When you look at the numbers of white Christians that have been sucked into this conspiracy theory, it's really a sort of heresy,” Rev. Jennifer Butler, the CEO of Faith in Public Life, told VICE News.

“It's wrong Church teaching. It's a misunderstanding of the Bible, but it's something QAnon built atop decades of bad theology, wrong belief, propaganda, in which people have been mistaught what Christianity actually is.”

The embrace of QAnon in the evangelical church can be traced back to the rise of the American religious right in the 1980s, with pastors such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, who brought politics into the church and embraced culture war issues like abortion, homosexuality, and pornography.

They also embraced Christian nationalism, the belief that the United States is fundamentally a Christian country whose laws should be informed by the teachings of the Bible. And it was this, more than anything, that paved the way for QAnon to take hold.


“When QAnon came around, it just lined up so well with everything that a lot of Christians were already thinking and talking about,” Kubilius said.

QAnon is a conspiracy theory that claims a secret group of elites is running a global child sex trafficking ring, and that former president Trump will someday soon expose these criminals and somehow return to the White House.

The conspiracy cult seeks to recruit an army of “digital soldiers” into a war between good and evil, where Trump represents the good while the Democrats and Hollywood elite who are supposedly involved in the sex trafficking ring represents the evil.

Such a narrative would be recognizable to many of those in the evangelical community.

“Being religious sort of predisposes you to believe in certain fantastical things, and QAnon is one of those fantastical ideas,” Ryan Burge, an assistant professor of political science at Eastern Illinois University, told VICE News. Burge is the author of “The Nones: Where They Came From, Who They Are, and Where They Are Going,” a book documenting the increasing number of Americans who say they are not religious, and a pastor in the First Baptist Church of Mount Vernon in Illinois.

While pastors openly promoting QAnon conspiracies from the pulpit is still relatively rare in evangelical circles, that doesn’t mean those conspiracies aren’t taking hold in the community.

A recent VICE News investigation found that pastors on YouTube were using the secret codewords of the QAnon conspiracy to spread these lies while avoiding being banned from the platform.

The evangelical church is made up of tens of thousands of churches across the country. While some of them are part of larger groups, such as the Southern Baptist Convention, in most cases, pastors are independent and operate without oversight from a bishop or other religious leader.

In many cases, pastors don’t even need a physical location to start a ministry.

“It's very decentralized,” Burge told VICE News. “People can sort of start their own ministry that doesn't even physically exist. It's mostly just them online with a webcam and a YouTube channel and a Facebook page.”

Kubilius says he knows of pastors in his own denomination who are guilty of spreading QAnon conspiracies, but he said “steps are being taken to address those problems in-house.”

Groups like the United Methodist Church have a strict set of boundaries determining what can and can’t be preached, and there is a regimented hierarchy where pastors are appointed to churches by bishops, rather than being allowed to simply establish a new church wherever they like.

“That's one of the reasons why some of that extremist ideology is not as likely to be found in main-line denominations as it is in specifically evangelical churches.”

Most evangelical churches are fighting to maintain their numbers, struggling with an aging congregation, and having difficulty attracting new members.

A recent survey by the Public Religion Research Institute found a dramatic drop in the number of white Americans who identify as evangelical Christians, from 23 percent of the population in 2006 to just 14 percent in 2020.


The survey also found that white evangelical Protestants are the oldest religious group in the U.S., with a median age of 56, compared to the median age in the country of 47.

Dwindling numbers of people in the pews means less money for pastors who rely solely on their congregation’s contributions to make a living.

“Asses in the seats equal dollars in the plate,” Gerencser said. “There's a direct connection between those: The more people you have, the more money you have.”


And so, as congregations dwindle, pastors in certain parts of the country have figured out that if they make their churches explicitly pro-Trump and are happy to accept or even preach about QAnon conspiracies, they're going to attract more people, and specifically men, who’ve been abandoning the church in recent years.

“For a lot of pastors, this is an untapped market. And if I want to grow a church quickly, this might be a way to do it,” Burge said.

And Burge warns that while actively promoting QAnon inside churches is still rare within the Christian community, speaking out against QAnon is equally rare.

The pandemic was a boon for QAnon, allowing it to flourish on mainstream social media platforms throughout 2020 at a time when a lot more people were stuck at home with more time on their hands to “do their own research.”

Kubilius says that since launching his podcast, he’s spoken to several pastors across the country dealing with this problem, and he says one pastor told him that when his congregation finally returned to in-person services, many of them had been radicalized into QAnon.

“Eventually he had to leave his church because this thing had been growing under his nose and he didn't even realize it,” Kubilius said.

“It's kind of baffled me, why the likes of the National Association of Evangelicals, for example, the largest umbrella group for evangelicals, or some of these megachurch pastors who pastor 10[000] or 20,000 people and should take a firm stand on these things, but they don't,” Gerencser said.

When asked about the issue, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) told VICE News to speak to Ed Setzer, a member of their board of directors.

Setzer wrote an article in USA Today a year ago warning that evangelicals need to deal with the QAnon horrors in their midst. “I found that a whole lot of people got mad at me for that, saying, ‘This is not an issue; you're just exaggerating.’ And then on January 6th, those people stopped saying I was exaggerating,” Setzer told VICE News.

But other major groups within the evangelical movement seem even less inclined to address the issue.


When the Southern Baptist Convention appointed Ed Litton as its new president this past summer, he was asked about how he plans to address the issue of QAnon within the evangelical movement. Litton dismissed it as “a fringe problem."

While Kubilius’ podcast and Gerencser’s website reach large numbers of people, neither has the reach of a national organization like the NAE. However, there are some groups attempting to put a more structured system in place.

One of those is Faith in Public Life, a political lobby group formed by Presbyterian Christians, whose CEO Jennifer Butler is well aware of the scale of the problem in the church.

“I lead a network of 20,000 religious leaders, and what I'm hearing is that everybody is grappling either with how to talk to their congregants about QAnon or to help their congregants talk to friends and family members. A lot of people are very distraught at seeing family members and the country get pulled into this,” Butler said.

The group is currently working with experts in the field of cults and conspiracy theories to put in place a training program that would equip pastors with the skills necessary to fight the spread of QAnon.

“We see congregations as being really watering holes of democracy, and truth, and we're trying to train folks to be able to handle this in a compassionate pastoral way but to also really equip their congregants to be able to stand up against conspiracy theories on a personal level while also helping them dismantle these erroneous beliefs,” Butler said.


But QAnon is a unique conspiracy that entices followers with the lure of secret knowledge, convincing them that they’ll be part of a great battle between good and evil, that they will be a digital soldier fighting on the front lines and saving the children. It’s alluring, and difficult to let go of.

“It’s very hard for these people to give up, even the ones who know its complete hogwash, because what it does is it injects a kind of purpose and meaning in people’s lives,” Kubilius said.

“It turns people into heroes; it convinces them that they are soldiers in a digital war for the soul of America. It’s very difficult to leave something like that behind.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

XsjadoBlayde

~it ends here~
Apr 29, 2020
3,376
3,500
118
Another one??


Hackers operating under the banner of Anonymous have released more data from Epik, the controversial web hosting company known for offering refuge to the far-right.

In a press release titled “You Lost The Game,” the hacktivist group announced on Monday part three of what it has dubbed “Operation EPIK FAIL.”



The latest leak is alleged to contain more bootable disk images of Epik’s servers as well as a data backup linked to the Republican Party of Texas, which is said to include “private documents” and “draft articles that didn’t make the narrative cut.” The Texas GOP website had been defaced by Anonymous in retaliation for the state’s controversial abortion ban on Sept. 11.

The Daily Dot is in the process of verifying the authenticity of the data after receiving it.

The campaign against Epik was first acknowledged on Sept. 13 when Anonymous revealed that it had breached the domain registrar, exposing at least 180GB of sensitive data. The hackers followed up on Sept. 30 with “The /b/ Sides,” a more than 300GB release containing bootable disk images of Epik’s servers.

The leaks have continued to cause widespread fallout for Epik’s customers, which includes websites such as Parler, Gab, 8chan, and TheDonald. The first release exposed everything from passwords and credit card numbers to customer names, email addresses, physical addresses, and phone numbers.

Epik CEO Rob Monster would eventually weigh in on the breach on Sept. 16 in an unorthodox video conference open to the public. The four-hour meeting saw Monster break out into prayer multiple times, issue warnings about “cursed” hard drives bursting into flames, and engage in a back-and-forth with a notorious neo-Nazi.

The data cache allowed the Daily Dot to discover not only websites that had been targeted with subpoenas by the FBI and others but trace the actions of prominent far-right figures such as Ali Alexander, who attempted to scrub his digital ties to dozens of domains relating to election fraud conspiracy theories in the wake of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

A real estate agent in Florida who was found to have registered numerous antisemitic domains also lost their job. A man who ran websites relating to the Proud Boys in Canada, where the far-right group is listed as a terrorist organization, was placed under investigation by his employer at a government-owned pipeline and energy company.

The Oath Keepers militia, which began using Epik following the failed insurrection, also had its data leaked on Sept. 27. Although those responsible did not claim affiliation with Anonymous, dates found within the data, which was given by the hackers to the journalism and transparency collective DDoSecrets, suggest the exposure could have been linked to Epik’s breach.

The Daily Dot was able to find at least 160 official government and military email addresses in a membership list compiled by the militia. Multiple investigations have been launched as a result of the leak. The New York Police Department (NYPD) announced last week that it had launched an internal review of two officers whose names were found in the breach.

The second release of Epik data resulted in the exposure of at least 59 API keys, which allow to securely communicate with one another, for services such as Twitter, Coinbase, and PayPal. Monster claimed during his live video conference with the public that someone had attempted to use his API key for Coinbase to steal $100,000.

It remains unclear what fallout will result from the third release as journalists and researchers struggle to sift through the enormous amounts of information already present in the previous two leaks.

The news of the latest leak was first reported by Steven Monacelli.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
29,416
12,245
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: XsjadoBlayde

Gergar12

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
3,923
864
118
Country
United States
So... the people that work somewhere (one could call them the "workers") collectively control that workplace (or "the means of production")?
With minimal academic, political, social, cultural, or economic hierarchies. You can still have common-sense ones like the military(If you are a soldier you cannot vote away charging a hill since the enemy may gain that hill, and murder your nation afterward in a series of cascading steps), parent to offspring, and teacher and student that are required. The keyword being political. Direct democracy doesn't equal democratic socialism. In a direct democracy, you are not dependent on the whims of lawmakers, and unelected bureaucrats made up of academics.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,476
7,051
118
Country
United States
But they aren't individualised pronouns, are they? They will reflect certain circumstances - likely to be things such as gender, age, relative social class, formality / informality, and some might be dialects. As with, say, French with tu / vous for the singular second person. There are guidelines dictating which one to use, and they are still generically applicable.

Communication is instrinsically a communal business, because it is pointless with only one person. In that sense, there is some need for communication to serve everyone: more than just the individual who wants to make up new words and demand others hold to them. It is a burden to expect people to hold a vast range of individual pronouns (remember, this could theoretically be billions) and their risk of discomfort in case they make error, plus the increased risk of error and consequent unhappiness of the person whose pronoun is fumbled. Bluntly, it is a point where an individual's right to self-expression needs to take a backseat to society communicating smoothly.
"The number could theoretically be billions" is internet catastrophizing that doesn't hold up in meatspace. There's millions of different names out there in the world but you aren't expected to memorize them all, so why that bizarre standard for pronouns? Just how many different people to you talk about with others in the third person?
Or delete all gender-specific pronouns in entirety: one pronoun set for anyone and everyone (I actually find that idea quite attractive, because it also has the beauty of simplicity). Or just give up on (third person singular) pronouns entirely. They are technically unncessary - after all a pronoun is simply a convenient, generic substitution for another noun or group of nouns. If people want individualisation, cut the Gordian knot by scrapping the substitution.
Well now you've pissed off the "they aren't people, they're women" brigade
Thus a limited number of established neopronouns to reflect some gender variability, okay (and I think one set e.g. ze/hir is enough). Individualised ones, no.
Look, if we're gonna laughably attempt to standardize the English language, white people spelling names badly changes first, followed by standardizing double last names. I don't tend to use pronouns on databases
 
Last edited:

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,476
7,051
118
Country
United States
As a Neo-pronoun can be anything it can literally be a slur and as you said you should use it when asked because that's their pronoun choice.
So can names in the vast majority of US states. And it generally won't happen because it's rock stupid. You're just internet poisoned.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,476
7,051
118
Country
United States
Yours sucks worse because the specifics presented that I was arguing against was not using gender but sex. Yours relied on bringing in concepts of gender not sex to the argument. Want to try actually presenting a counter argument using the specific restrictions of not being allowed to use Gender but only talk about it from the perspective of sex and that almost entirely alone?

8 < 107
8 < 224

That's your explanation.
It's a shitty one, seeing as I've got no idea what you're on about. Once we get different terms for human sex and human gender, you might have a point, but as long as we use homonyms and homographs for them it's gonna be an issue
Until you run into an activist with an axe to grind and end up becoming a target to crusade against.

The Gynaecologist one hasn't been rejected it's on hold along with like 20+ more because Yaniv hasn't yet paid the losses of the first case yet. Also deny them being able to bring insanely frivolous ones that can be seen as just that would mean it would help actual cases get seen quicker.
"Insanely frivolous" according to who? And do you want the government to have that power, seeing as the mainstream thinks a lot of your ideas are fringe nonsense?
Anyway, you're also wrong on specifics
Ah yes lets totally lets make all food gluten free cause the what less than 1% of people like me can't eat wheat. Be careful how much you decide to start accommodating because I'd say my massive and rather nasty upset bowels that can be bad for up to 2 weeks if I eat what might be a bit more serious than some-one feeling a little left out.
1) I don't give a shit about the state of your bowels
2) like you said, most people are going to use common pronouns. Acknowledging the existence of a handful of different pronouns that might apply to a handful of people you know is a lot more like accommodating for the gluten intolerance of maybe a handful of people coming to an event. Except cheaper