Asklemmy

47133 readers

1384 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

104

How do the likes of JD Vance and Drumpf rationalise no more DEI when they have wives who are DEI? It makes no sense. (lemmy.blahaj.zone)

submitted 4 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

48 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Rules are there to punish bad morality.

Trump and Vance are seen as morally good, so the rules don't apply as they can do no bad. Things that the Others want, such as DEI, are naturally morally bad and every rule to punish them is fully enforced, and a few new rules are added as needed.

Rule of law and consistency do not apply for them.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago

"Rules for thee, not for me" and all that.