top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[+] 325 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (18 children)
  • [–] 80 points 2 years ago (12 children)

    You reminded me of something I read from back around when that bloke got elected, regarding amongst other things, the decline in the rule of law mattering to society...

    "The greatness of Rome, brilliant with repeated marks of prosperity, has gradually faded... the ancient glory of military prowess and valour has almost passed away... by the growth of wealth and luxury.

    The Roman world is falling: yet we concern ourselves with trifles… We heap up riches that perish and bury our gold in the earth as if we were piling up treasures in a lifetime of prosperity.

    Rome was great and could tolerate its own vices as long as they were held in check by some degree of virtue; but when our hands ceased to uphold the laws, when avarice and luxury sapped the nation’s strength, the state itself lost control and went its way.

    The finest men were shut out from office by the lowest dregs of society, who, having won the favour of the mob by base means, ventured to grasp at the highest offices.

    The greater her glory, the more incredible it seems that she has been brought so low.

    Empires are mortal. Rome has perished. Though she was built upon such firm foundations, Rome has sunk by her own weight."

    - Ammianus Marcellinus, Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus, Tacitus, Aurelius Ambrosius, Aurelius Augustinus Hipponensis. 56 - 430 AD.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Can you indicate which author is associated with which portion of your quoted text? I'm looking to verify the provenance of these statements. Thank you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago

    Alas no, I saw this a while back and saved it. I believe they're mostly a mix of direct quotes (or as much as one can be given they weren't speaking English), and a lot of summations from their published works. So rather than reading a whole book, you get a few sentences carrying their main points.

    At least that's what I recall :-)

    My suggestion would be to look in to the authors, find their relevant works and give them a read, that'll give you the same thoughts and opinions but with way more detail :-D

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (10 replies)
  • [+] 29 points 2 years ago (3 children)
  • [–] 129 points 2 years ago (14 children)

    On Monday, 26-year-old Daniel Penny was acquitted after killing Jordan Neely, a desperate Black homeless man on the subway...

    Tale as old as time.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 2 years ago (13 children)

    “…on the grounds that he was trying to protect others.”

    I think that’s a pretty fucking important line right there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

    I think the point is, the system pushed one man to his breaking point simply for being poor, black, and mentally ill; resulting in his eventual strangulation on a subway. Not saying the the situation didn't require intervention but acting as if the whole thing was "unavoidable" or even "justified" gladiator giving all the context is Pretty Fucking Important

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    It wasn't unavoidable but also it was his aggressive behaviour towards others that directly lead to him being subdued. I'm not sure the situation would've been different with a white guy acting aggressive towards fellow passengers, especially a mother and her child.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    The point is neither situation should ever happen in a system that puts humanity over profits. A mentally ill, homeless, and starving person should exist in our society because we have the means to house, feed, and provide Healthcare for everyone. (we just don't have the morality)

    Also, the strangle hold was applied for 5 min. I'm no expert but when someone goes limp from blood flow being blocked, you usually don't need to continue choking them for an additional 4 min.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (7 replies)
  • [–] 99 points 2 years ago* (74 children)

    I've seen people comparing the DOJ response to Luigi Mangioni and Kyle Shittenhouse. The fact that Rittenhouse is free should tell you everything you need to know.

  • source
  • hideshow 74 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (73 children)

    Well the difference is that while both actively premeditated their murders whoever committed the crimes Mangioni has been accused of is far more of a menace because they had a specific target in mind and even worse it was someone rich instead of just anyone protesting the police tendency to murder.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 73 child comments
  • load more comments (48 replies)
  • [–] 61 points 2 years ago

    A stark reminder of who the justice system works for. They are there to protect the rich elites.

  • source
  • [–] 51 points 2 years ago

    Yup. The irony wasn't lost on us either.

  • source
  • [+] 37 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 35 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    "Sen. John Fetterman is one of those who has loudly insisted that the “public execution of an innocent man and father of two is indefensible.” We are expected to ignore the fact that for 14 months straight before Thompson’s killing, Israeli forces have publicly executed thousands of innocent men, women, and children in Gaza with the enthusiastic support of US politicians like Fetterman."

    Normally I'm not one to dig into these things, but I seriously think fetterman died and the dude we hear from now is a stand in. Just such a 180... I remember when he was first gaining national prominence, had some interview in front of a Wawa off the freeway - when I saw THAT guy, I donated to his campaign and called my wife in to say, "listen to this for a second, I think this guy could be the president one day". That guy has ZERO DNA in common with the "Fetterman" we see and hear from today. It wasn't a stroke, or if it was, it was fatal.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 35 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I don't think these are comparable.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago

    I think there are two primary reasons for the difference in treatment of these two killings

    1. The killing of the CEO was meant to be a message to the country. It's a different scale. Because something like this is such a spectacle, it gets national attention and the local and federal authorities are forced to deal with it quickly- otherwise they lose face.

    2. Ultimately the power structure cannot tolerate these types of rebellions. It's like a slave talking back to the master. You allow it once and you open the door for it to happen again. You have to try and shut it down as quickly as possible.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago

    Matt Stone killed a homeless man?

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    but killing rich people is illegal!

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 11 points 2 years ago (41 children)

    This is not a juxtaposition at all. Terrible ethics aside, the CEO operated more or less totally in compliance with USA law. Being a fucking scumbag is not illegal -- indeed, our country sadly runs on this principle.

    The fellow in the subway was acting to a DIRECT threat, and it's pretty easy to draw a line from that guy flipping out to someone being threatened/hurt/killed in the subway. He was already culpable of disorderly conduct or worse, and it's pretty clear that it wasn't Penny's intent to fatally injure him.

    The juxtaposition some people feel is because the CEO is acting against their moral framework, but he's operating in a legal framework. This is why our country is fucking sick, but it is is what it is at this point.

  • source
  • hideshow 41 child comments
  • load more comments (38 replies)
    [–] 9 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    I don't understand who is the guy on the right?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›